stu    v 
FOREIGN  SERVICE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 

HEARINGS 

2  10  BEFORE  THE 

[TTEE  ON  FOREIGN  AFFAIRS 
MOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES 

SIXTY-SEVENTH  CONGKESS 

^  FOURTH  SESSION 

OS 

0  ON 

?1  H.  R.  12543 

3  I 

7  THE  REORGANIZATION  AND  IMPROVEMENT  OF  THE 

FOREIGN  SERVICE  OF  THE  UNITED  STflfes, 
AND  FOR  OTHER  PURPOSES 


DECEMBER  11,  12,  13,  14,  15,  19,  1922 


STATEMENTS  OF 
Hon.  CHARLES  EVANS  HUGHES,  Secretary  of  State 

Hon.  ROBERT  Pi  SKINNER,  Consul  General  of  the  United  States 
London,  England 

Hon.  WILBUR  J.  CAKR,  Director  of  the  Consular  Sendee 
State  Department 

Mr.  TRACY  LAY,  Consular  Service,  Department  of  State 

Hon.  JOHN  W.  DAVIS,  Formerly  Ambassador  to  Great  Britain 

Hon.  FRANK  L.  POLK,  Formerly  Undersecretary  of  State 


WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT   PRINTING    OFFICE 
1922 


FOREIGN  SERVICE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


HEARINGS 

BEFORE  THE 

COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  AFFAIRS 
y.S.C^HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES 

SIXTY-SEVENTH  CONGRESS 

FOUUTH  SESSION 


H.  R.  12543 

FOR  THE  REORGANIZATION  AND  IMPROVEMENT  OF  THE 

FOREIGN  SERVICE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES, 

AND  FOR  OTHER  PURPOSES 


DECEMBER  11,  12,  13,  14,  15,  19,  1922 


STATEMENTS  OF 
Hon.  CHARLES  EVANS  HUGHES,  Secretary  of  State 

Hon.  ROBERT  P.  SKINNER,  Consul  General  of  the  United  States 
London,  England 

Hon.  WILBUR  J.  CARR,  Director  of  the  Consular  Service 
State  Department 

Mr.  TRACY  LAY,  Consular  Service,  Department  of  State 

Hon.  JOHN  W.  DAVIS,  Formerly  Ambassador  to  Great  Britain 

Hon.  FRANK  L.  POLK,  Formerly  Undersecretary  of  State 


WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT   PRINTING    OFFICE 
1022 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  AFFAIRS, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES. 
SIXTY-SEVENTH  CONGRESS,  FOURTH  SESSION. 

STEPHEN  G.  PORTER,  Pennsylvania,  Chairman. 

JOHN  JACOB  ROGERS,  Massachusetts.  J.  CHARLES  LINTHICUM,  Maryland. 

HENRY  W.  TEMPLE,  Pennsylvania.  CHARLES  M.  STEDMAN,  North  Carol ii 

AMBROSE  KENNEDY,  Rhode  Island.  ADOLPH  J.  SABATH,  Illinois. 

EDWARD  E.  BROWNE,  Wisconsin.  TOM  CONNALLY,  Texas. 

MERRILL  MOORES,  Indiana.  W.  BOURKE  COCKRAN,  New  York. 

ERNEST  R.  ACKERMAN,  New  Jersey.  R.  WALTON  MOORE,  Virginia. 

JAMES  T.  BEGG,  Ohio. 
HENRY  ALLEN  COOPER,  Wisconsin. 
THEODORE  E.  BURTON,  Ohio. 
BENJAMIN  L.  FAIRCHILD,  New  York. 
HAMILTON  FISH,  JR.,  New  York. 
THEODORE  HUKRIEDE,  Missouri. 
J.  M.  C.  SMITH,  Michigan. 
CYRBNU8  COLE,  Iowa. 

EDMDKP  F.  EBK,  Clerk. 
II 


INDEX. 


A. 

Page. 

Ability,   special »,  6 

Absence : 

From  service 

Leaves  of 

Accounts 2,  54,  55 

Advancement,  prospects   of 7,  39,  77,  86,  87,  89,  90 

Age: 

At  death 31,32 

Of  appointees 31 

Of  retirement 3,  9.  34-36 

Agriculture.  Department  of 12,80.81 

Aliens  and  immigrants 

Allowances : 

Local 22,73 

Post 11, 19.  24,  65.  73,  97,  99 

Representation 3,  20-24,  73,  90,  94,  97,  99 

Representation  in  the  British  foreign  service 20 

Ambassador : 

American,   at   Paris 23 

British 22,23 

Ambassadors : 

Assignment  to  Department  of  State 50-53 

Bonds 64 

Retirement 3.72 

Withdrawal  of 53,  74 

Americanism  of  officers 69,70,77,79 

Americanization  of  service 79 

American  citizens 1 

Annuitants 3.  9.  31 

Number   of 31.  33 

Annuities 3,  31,  35 

Applications,  number  of 97 

Appointments : 

Charges 3.  66 

Commissioners 3.66 

Consular  officers 1, 16,  40-47.  87 

Diplomatic  agents 3,  66 

Diplomatic   secretaries 1. 16.  40.  41,  43-47,  66.  87 

Foreign-service  officers 1.  3. 16.  40.  41,  43-47.  66,  87 

From  eligible  list 43,44 

In  Department  of  State 42 

Ministers 3.  66 

Appraisers,  Board  of 14 

Appropriations : 

Consular  and  Diplomatic  Service 10,  27,  55 

First,  for  retirement  fund 3,  9, 10,  29 

Subsequent,    for   retirement   fund 4,  9, 10,  29,  31,  55 

Approval  of  H.  R.  12543  by  President 4.  58,  59 

Aptitude  for  foreign  service 5.  6 

Army  officers 33.  34.  70 

Army  retirement 9,33,34.  70 

Assignment  of  ambassadors  and  ministers  to  Department  of  State.  50-58,  ."4.  (58 
Assignment  of  foreign  service  officers 1,  46.  55.  65 

in 


IV  INDEX. 

Page. 

Assignment  of  foreign  service  officers  to  Department  of  State 3,  50-53 

Austria : 

Foreign  ser\  ice  of . 

Retirement  system 16 

Availability  for  special  work —       5,6 

Average  annual   salary '. 81,35 

B. 

BakhmetefY,  Mr.,  Russian  ambassador 74 

Ballantine.  Mr.,  interpreter 50 

Barnes.  Mr.  Julius  H. : 

Letter  from  Secretary  of  State Gl 

Letter  to  House  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs 

Basic  salary 73 

Belgium  : 

Foreign   service  of 78 

Retirement  system 16 

Bills  of  health 81 

Bonds 2, 19,  53,  64 

British  Ambassador  at  Paris 23 

British  Ambassador  at  Washington 22 

British  foreign  service,  table 20.-J1.-J2 

British  general  consular  service ' 15 

British  far  eastern  service 15 

British  near  eastern  service 15 

Buildings,    ownership    of—  ._  11,13,23,75,93,94,95 

r. 

CHIT.  Mr.   Wilbur  .!..  statement,  of l!>-7<; 

Chamber  of  Commerce  of  the  Tinted  States 98 

Charges,   appointment  of  foreign  serv.ee  officers  as 3,  OU 

China,    foreign    service   of 7.x 

Citizenship    _ i 82 

Civil  Service  Commission 43 

Civil-service  Employees 32.  42 

Claims  Department  at  London 85 

Classes: 

Annuitants    3,  9, 31.  35.  3i; 

Officers  in  British  foreign  service ±_> 

United  States  consular  oilicers 5.  ID.  -- 

United  States  diplomatic  officers 5,  19.  JS 

United  States  foreign  service  officers 1,4,  2±  -jx.  L'!t 

Climatic  conditions 7o.  71 

Colleges  and  universities,  courses  in 40 

Commerce,  Chamber  of,  of  the  United  States 98 

Commerce.  Department  of 11,12,17,18.80,81 

Commercial  attaches 1:2.  XI 

Commercial  work  and   reports 11, 17.  79,  X',' 

Comparative  statements.      (See  Tables.) 

Commissioners,  appointments  of  foreign  service  officers  as :?.  lit  I 

Compensation  of  foreign  service  officers I.L'S 

Comptroller's  decisions , 0!) 

Conferences,    trade p,.  OX.  09 

Confirmation  of  consular  and  diplomatic  officers 45,  J.»! 

Confirmation  of  foreign  service  officers 1,  46,  48,  (57,  6* 

Congresses    : ?, 

Congress  of  Vienna 07 

Consular  Service,  appropriations  for 10,27,55 

Consular  and  diplomatic  duties  compared 5.  30,  4x 

Consular  officers : 

Appointment    of 1, 10.  4O-47,  S7 

I'er  cent  of  contribution  to  retirement  fund 30.  in.:1,.", 

Rccommissioning    of : ^ 1.  -j, 

Consular  Service: 

Personnel.  British  and  United  States  compared -J2 

1'roposed  reclassification  of ._  27-29,99 


INDEX.  V 

Page. 

Consuls  general  at  large 

Contributions  to  retirement   fund —  3,  9,  29,  :JO.  31 .  84,  TS 

From  ambassadors  and  ministers 72,73 

In   British  service -  1C>.  31 

Per  rent  of.  by  Government  and  officers—  -_  30,81.83 

Costa  Rica,  withdrawal  of  minister  to 74 

Cost    of  Hving_Tl      11,15,20,78 

Courses  in  universities  and  colleges 

Credit    reports —  -    17,  IS 

1). 

Date  on  which  act  takes  effect 4 

Davis,  Mr.  John  \V.,  statement  of — 89 

Deductions  from  salary  tor  retirement  fund "         3 

Demotion 1,30,43,45 

Denmark,  foreign  service  of 78 

Designation  by  1'resident 1 

Details  for  special  duty 3.08 

Details  for  duty  in  other  departments 72 

Dignity  of  United  States  representatives  abroad 11,90 

Diplomatic  and  consular  duties  compared 5,36,48 

1  >iplomatic  agents,  appointments  of  foreign  service  officers  as 3,  06 

Diplomatic  Service: 

Appropriations  for 10,  27,  55 

British  and  United  States  compared 22 

Diplomatic  secretaries : 

Appointment   of 1, 16,  40,  41,  43-47,  87 

Kecommissioning  of 1,  2 

Disability,  retirement  on  account  of 5,36,45 

Dispatch   agency ._  12, 13 


Econouiic  character  of  international  problems 5.  17.  79^80,  98 

Economic  conditions  ;it  posts ._  11,15,20 

Eligible  list 43,44 

Entrance   into   service 1,16,26,37,40-47,85,87 

Examinations 1,  37,  40-44,  85 

Statistics   of 42 

Expansion  of  service 8,29,31 

Expenses  for  subsistence 3,68,69 

F. 

Federal  Reserve  Board,  work  performed  for 79 

Fees : 

Accounting  for 2,  54,  55 

Revenue  from 10 

Fletcher.  Ambassador,  assignment  to  Department  of  State 50,  52,  73,  74 

Foreign  service,  British  and  United  States  compared 20 

Foreign  service: 

Inspectors 2.  54,  62,  63 

Officers— 

Appointments--.! 1,3, 16,  40,  41,  43-47,  66.  87 

Assignments 1.  8,  46,  50-53,  55,  65 

Classes   of 1.4.  22,  2S,  29 

Confirmation 1,  46,  48.  67,  68 

Contributions  to  retirement  fund 3,9.29,31,34,78 

Hcta.ls  for  special  duty 8.  6S.  72 

Expenses  for  subsistence .    8,68,69 

Per  cent  of  contribution  to  retirement  fund.._.  __  30,31,33 

Ueclassification 27-29 

Recommissioning 1. 19.  46 

Reimbursement  of  contributions 78 

Retirement 3.  30,  31,  38,  45,  78 

Salaries _    19.  29,  31.  49.  55 


VI  INDEX. 

F<  >  reign  service — Continued. 

Officers — Continued.  Pa«*- 

Service  in  and  outside  of  Washington,  D.  C 68 

Status  as  diplomatic  or  consular  officers 

Subsistence  expenses 3.  68,69 

Transfers 1, 19,  36,  42,  43,  46,  47,  49,  50-53,  35,  74 

Fortunes,    private 8,  40,  78,  86,  89,  92.  96,  99 

France : 

Foreign  service  of 10,26,39,78 

Retirement  system 16 

G. 
Qermany: 

Foreign  service  of 78 

Retirement  system : 16 

Government,  per  cent  of  contribution  to  retirement  fund 30,  31,  33 

Great  Britain: 

Fore  gn  service  of 10, 15, 16, 19,  20.  26,  39.  73,  88 

Representation  allowances 20,  22 

Retirement  system 15 

Salaries  in  foreign  service 20,96 

H. 

Hughes,  Mr.  Charles  Evans,  statement  of 4—12 

I. 

Immigrants  and  vises 1 82 

Improvement  in  service  since  1906 37-39 

Incapacity  to  serve 35 

Incentive  for  young  men 7.  29.  77,  86  87 

Income,  private 8.  40,  78.  86,  89.  92,  96,  99 

Incumbents,  present 6,  9 

Inspectors  and  inspection 2,54.62,63 

Interest  of  officers  in  the  bill 17,  27,  86 

Interest  rate  on  retirement  contributions 3 

Interior,  Secretary  of _T 4 

Interpreters ' -<- 49,  50 

Investments  by  consul ^ 78 

Invoices,   consular 14,  85,  86 

Italy: 

Foreign  service  of_I 39 

Retirement  system 1 16 

J.  • 

Japan,  foreign  service  of • • 78 

.Judicial  officers,  retirement  of 34 

K. 

Kerensky  government,  ambassador  of " 74 

L. 

Labor  turnover  in  Diplomatic  Service 91 

I.eavi-s  of  absence ' 71 

Lehlhach   bill 30.  34.  35 

Length  of  service • 3.32.85,78 

Letters  : 

Harnes.  Mr.  .Julius  H..  to  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs , 98 

Chamber  of  Commerce,  of  the  United  States 98 

President  to  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs 58 

President  to  Mr.  Rogers 59 

.Secretary  of  State  to  Mr.  P.arnes 01 

Secretary  of  State  to  Mr.  Rogers 59 

Liverpool,    consulate    at 6,9.88 


INDEX.  VII 


Local  allowances  _____________________________________________________        73 

Lodge,  Senator,  letter  from  President  __________________________________        58 

London,  consulate  general  ___________________________  6,  9,  14,  36,  47,  48,  79,  88 

Longevity  ____________________________________________________________  31,32 

M. 
Maximum  annuities  ________________________________________________  3,  31,  35 

Means,  private  ____________  ________________________  8,  40,  78,  86,  89,  92,  96,  99 

Medical  care  _________________________________________________________        34 

Mexico  ______________________________________________________________         74 

Minimum  annuities  ________________________________________________  3,31,35 

Ministers  ____________________________________________________________  3 

Assignment  to  Department  of  State  ________________________________  50,  53 

Bonds  ___________________________________________________________         64 

Ministers  resident,  appointment  of  foreign  service  officers  as  ____________     3,66 

Ministers,  retirement  of  ______________________________________________     3,  72 

N. 
Navy  Department  attaches  ____________________________________________  12,81 

Navy  officers  ____________________________________________________  _  ____  33,  34 

Navy  retirement  ___________________________________________________  9,33,34 

Norway,  foreign  service  of  ____________________________________________        78 

Notarial  services  _____________________________________________________        85 

Number  of  annuitants  ________________________________________________  31,  33 

Numbers  retired  _____________________________________________________  31,  33 

O. 

Officers,  foreign  service,  per  cent  of  contribution  to  retirement  fund—  30,  31,  33 
Official  acts  of  foreign  service  officers  _________________________________  1 

Official  positions  in  department  _______________________________________          3 

Officers,  foreign  service: 

Classes  _______________________________  i  ___________________________          1 

Compensation  ____________________________________________________          1 

Other  departments  _______________________________________  11,  12,  17,  18,  80,  81 

Work   for  _______________________________________________________         72 

Ownership  of  buildings-—  ._  11.13,23.63,75,93,94,96 

Paris: 

Ambassador  at  — 

American  ___________________________________________________         23 

Brit:sh  ______________________________________________________         23 

Consulate  general  _______________________________________________  6,  9,  88 

Peck,  Mr.    (  interpreter  )___.  _________________  _________________________         49 

Pensions  __________________________________________________________  3,  31,  33 

Per  cent  of  contribution  to  fund  by  officers  and  by  the  Government  ___  30,  31,  33 
Per  diem  ____________________________________________________________     3,  68 

Period  of  service  _____________________________________________________  3 

Personnel,  British  and  United  States  Consular  and  Diplomatic  Service—         22 
Polk,  Mr.  Frank  ______________________________________________________        95 

Portugal,  retirement  system  __________________________________________         16 

Post  allowances  __________________________________________  11.  19,  24,  65,  97.  99 

Present  incumbents  __________________________________________________       6,  9 

President  of  the  United  States: 

Approval  of  H.  II.  12543  ________________________________________  4,  58,  59 

Letter'  to  Secretary  of  State  _____________________________________         56 

Letter  to  Senator  Lodge  __________________________________________         58 

Letter  to  Mr.  J.  J.  Rogers  ________________________________________         59 

Prestige  of  United  States  representatives  abroad  ______________________  11.90 

Private  fortunes  ____________________________________  8,  40,  78^86,  89,  92.  96,  99 

Promotion  ______________________________________________________  1,  30,  43.  45 

Pro  rata  representation  for  States  _____________________________________         44 

Provisions  of  previous  law  ____________________________________________  4 


VIII  INDEX. 

K. 

Page. 

Recruiting  new  officers 26 

Reclassification.  proposed 27-29.99 

Recommission  of  consular  officers  and  diplomatic  secretaries ._  1, 19.  46 

Reimbusement  of  contributions 78 

Removal  from  service 48,49 

Representation    allowances . 3.  20, 22,  24,  90.  94,  97.  l>!> 

In  British   tore  gn   service.: '.'-. --  '_'<).  '2'2 

Rquirements  of  service J 0 

Residence  of  ambassador  at  London 12. 18 

Resignations 22,  26,  87,  9r».  !>7 

Retirement 3 

Age   of 3 

Of  ambassadors  and  ministers 3,72 

Annuities :» 

Of  Army  officrs 9,33,34,70 

On  account  of  disability 45.  <>!> 

Before  age  of  65 . 78 

Cost  of,  to  Government 30 

Fund,  appropriations  for 3,4,9,10,29.31.5.") 

Great  Britain,  system  of 1." 

.Judicial   officers 34 

IVr  cent  of  contribution  to.  by  officers  and  Government 30,31,33 

Of  ministers  and  ambassadors 3,72 

Of  Navy   officers 9,33.34 

Hosiers.    Mr.    John    Jacob 59 

Letter   from    President 59 

Letter  from   Secretary  of  State 59 

Russia—  51.03.74 

S. 
Salaries : 

Average ^ , 31 .  55 

Basic 73 

British   foreign  service 20,21,95 

Increase   in 27,  29,  88.  89 

Reduction    in 8, 9 

Retired  officers  in  British  service :;:•. 

Size   of 8,  9.  19,  23,  26,  7S.  SS.  92.  90 

Uniform    scale T 19,  29,  49 

Seamen 81 

Secretary  of  State: 

Letter  to  President 56 

Letter  to  Mr.  J.  J.  Rogers 59 

Letter  to  Mr.  Barnes 61 

Statement    of 4 

Separation   from   service 3,12,26,32,48,49,87" 

Service : 

In  Department  of  State 3,68 

In  United  States  outside  Washington,  D.  C 68 

Length    of 3,  32.  35,  78 

Period  of 3 

Shipping 81 

Shipping  Board 12 

Skinner.  Mr.  Robert  P.,  statement  of 12-18,  76-89 

Special  duty 3 

Stall'  of  consulate  general  at  London 14 

Staffs  of  embassies 7 

Statement  of  Mr.  Carr 19-76 

Statement  of  Mr.   Davis 89 

Statement  of  Mr.  Hughes 4-12 

Statement  of  Mr.   Polk 

Statement  of  Mr.   Skinner 12-18,76-89 

Statements    ( Nrr  Tallies.) 
Statistics : 

( 'ollection  of 

Of  entrance  examinations 42 


INDEX.  IX 

Page. 

Status  of  foreign  service  officers 48 

Subsistence  expenses 3,  68,  69 

T. 

Tables  : 

British  foreign   service 22 

Comparative  statement — 

British  and  United  States  foreign  service 20 

British  and  United   States  salaries — 

Ambassadors  and  ministers 21. 

Consuls 21 

British  and  United  States  personnel — 

Diplomatic   service 22 

( 'onsular   service 22 

Consular  Service,  United  States,  proposed  ^classification 27-20 

Diplomatic  Service,  United  States,  proposed  reelassilication 27-29 

Entrance  examination  statistics 42 

Foreign  service  retirement 30 

Proposed    reclassifi.cn  tion 27-29 

liet.'rement  pay  in  British  consular  service 33 

IJetiremc-nt  pay  in  United  States  Army  and  Navy 33 

Retirement  fund,  United  States  foreign  service 80 

Trade    conferences 3,  68,  69 

Trade  promotion 5, 37, 19,  80 

Transfers: 

Service  to  service 19,36,46,47,49 

Department  of  State  to  foreign  service 1.  42,  43 

From  foreign  service  to  Department  of  State 50-53,55.74 

Place  to  place 49 

Travel    expenses 3, 69 

Treasury  Department 12.  81 

Turnover,  labor,  in  Diplomatic  Service 91 

U. 

TTnhealthful  posts 34,  70,  71 

Unification   of  services 5,19,29.46,47,76,96,99 

Uniform  salary  scale 19,29,49 

United  States  Public  Health  Service 81,82 

United  States  Public  Health  surgeon 81,  83 

V. 

Vacancies,  number  of 97 

Vienna,  Congress  of 67 

Vises  for  alien  immigrants 82 

\V. 

War  claims 85 

War  Department 12,  81 

Washington.  D.  C. : 

Service   in 68 

Service   outside   of 68 

White,    Mr.    Henry 18 

Withdrawal  of  ambassadors  and  ministers ._  53,  74 


FOREIGN  SERVICE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  AFFAIRS, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

Monday,  December  11, 1922. 

The  committee  this  clay  met,  Hon.  Stephen  G.  Porter  (chairman) 
presiding. 

The  committee  had  under  consideration  H.  R.  12543,  which  reads 
as  follows : 

A  BILL  For  the  reorganization  and  improvement  of  the  Foreign  Service  of  the  United 
States,  and  for  other  purposes. 

lie  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States 
of  America  in  Congrexx  assembled;  That  hereafter  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular 
Service  of  the  United  States  shall  he  known  as  the  Foreign  Service  of  the 
United  States. 

SEC.  2.  That  the  officers  in  the  Foreign  Service  shall  hereafter  be  graded  and 
classified  as  follows,  with  the  salaries  of  each  class  herein  affixed  thereto: 
Ambassadors  and  ministers  as  now  or  hereafter  provided — Foreign  Service 
officer,  class  1,  $9,000:  Foreign  Service  officer,  class  2,  $8,000;  Foreign  Service 
officer,  class  3  (of  whom  as  many  as  may  be  provided  for  by  Congress  annually 
upon  the  recommendation  of  the  Secretarv  of  State  shall  be  designated  as  For- 
eign Service  inspectors),  $7,000:  Foreign  Service  officer,  class  4,  $6.000;  For- 
eign Service  officer,  class  .">.  $5.000:  Foreign  Service  officer,  class  6,  $4.500; 
Foreign  Service  officer,  class  7,  $4,000;  Foreign  Service  officer,  class  8,  $3,500; 
Foreign  Service  officer,  class  9.  $3,000. 

SEC.  3.  That  the  official  designation  "  Foreign  Service  officer,"  as  employed 
throughout  this  act,  shall  he  deemed  to  denote  permanent  officers  in  the  Foreign 
Service  below  the  grade  of  minister  who  are  subject  to  promotion  on  merit 
and  who  may  be  assigned  to  duty  in  either  the  diplomatic  or  the  consular 
branch  of  the  Foreign  Service  at  the  discretion  of  the  President. 

SEC.  4.  That  Foreign  Service  officers  may  be  appointed  as  secretaries  in  the 
Diplomatic  Service  or  as  consular  officers  or  both :  Provided,  That  all  such 
appointments  shall  be  made  and  confirmed  as  heretofore:  And  provided  fur- 
ther, That  all  official  acts  of  such  officers  while  on  duty  in  either  the  diplomatic 
or  the  consular  branch  of  the  Foreign  Service  shall  be  performed  under  their 
respective  commissions  as  secretaries  or  as  consular  officers. 

SEC.  5.  That  hereafter  appointments  to  the  position  of  foreign  service  officer 
shall  be  made  after  examination  or  by  transfer  from  the  Department  of  State, 
under  such  rules  and  regulations  as  the  President  may  prescribe :  Provided, 
That  no  candidate  shall  be  eligible  for  examination  for'  foreign  service  officer 
who  is  not  an  American  citizen  and  who  has  not  been  designated  by  the  President. 

SEC.  6.  That  before  the  date  on  which  this  act  goes  into  effect  the  Secretary 
of  State  shall  recommend  to  the  President  the  names  of  those  secretaries  in 
the  diplomatic  service,  consuls  general,  consuls,  and  vice  consuls  who  for  reasons 
of  demonstrated  efficiency  are  entitled  to  be  recommissioned  as  foreign  service 
officers  of  the  respective  classes  specified  in  this  act,  and  the  names  of  those 
officers  who,  through  failure  to  demonstrate  or  maintain  the  requisite  degree  of 
efficiency,  should  be  recommissioned  to  classes  lower  than  those  specified  or 
otherwise  treated  as  exceptions  within  the  discretion  of  the  President. 

SKC.  7.  That  subject  to  the  limitations  imposed  by  section  6  hereof  secretaries 
now  in  the  diplomatic  service,  as  provided  in  an  act  entitled  "An  act  for  the 
improvement  of  the  foreign  service."  approved  February  n.  191;".  shall,  in  addi- 
tion to  their  present  commissions,  be  recommissioned  and  reclassified  as  follows: 


2  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

Secretaries  f>f  class.  bnVadtlns  sis  counselors  of  embassy  shall  be  recommis- 
sioned  as  foreign  ^service  officers  of  .class  one. 

Secre;;  jju$  on;-  a::ti;.g  as  counselors  of  legation  shall  be  recornmis- 

sioned  as  fofeigtt  service  officer's  of  class  two. 

Secretaries  of  class  one  not  designated  to  act  as  counselors  shall  be  recom- 
missioned  as  foreign  service  officers  of  class  three. 

Secretaries  of  class  two  shall  be  recouimissioned  as  foreign  service  officers 
of  class  four. 

Secretaries  of  class  three  shall  be  recommissioned  as  foreign  service  officers 
of  class  six. 

Secretaries  of  class  four  shall  be  recomruissioned  as  foreign  service  officers  of 
class  eight. 

SEC.  8.  That  subject  to  the  limitations  imposed  by  section  6  hereof  consuls 
general,  consuls,  and  vice  consuls  now  in  the  service,  as  provided  in  an  act  en- 
t.tled  "An  act  for  the  improvement  of  the  foreign  service."  approved  February 
5,  1915,  shall,  in  addition  to  their  present  commissions,  be  recomuiissioned  and 
reclassified  as  follows : 

Consuls  general  of  class  one  and  consuls  general  of  class  two  shall  be  recom- 
missioned  as  foreign  service  officers  of  class  one.  . 

Consuls  general  of  class  three  shall  be  recommissioned  as  foreign-service 
officers  of  class  two. 

Consuls  general  of  class  four  and  consuls  general  at  large  shall  be  recommis- 
sioned  as  foreign-service  officers  of  class  three. 

Consuls  of  class  one.  consuls  of  class  two,  and  consuls  of  class  three  shall 
be  recommissioned  as  foreign-service  officers  of  class  four. 

Consuls  of  class  four  shall  be  recommiss.oned  as  foreign-service  officers  of 
class  five. 

Consuls  of  class  five  shall  be  recommissioned  as  foreign-service  officers  of 
class  six. 

Consuls  of  class  six  shall  be  reconnnissioned  as  foreign-service  officers  of 
class  seven. 

Consuls  of  class  seven  shall  be  recommissioned  as  foreign-service  of;:re:s 
of  class  eight. 

Consuls  of  class  e'ght  and  consuls  of  class  nine  shall  be  recommissioned  as 
foreign-service  officers  of  class  nine. 

Vice  consuls  of  career,  interpreters,  and  student  interpreters  shall  be  recoin- 
missioned  as  foreign-service  officers,  unclassified. 

SEC.  9.  That  consuls  general  of  class  one  and  consuls  of  class  one  holding 
office  at  the  t  me  this  act  takes  effect  shall  not  as  a  result  of'  their  recommis- 
sioniug  suffer  a  reduction  in  salary  below  that  which  they  are  then  receiving : 
]'r»i-i<1r;d.  Jwirevcr,  That  this  provision  shall  apply  only  to  the  incumbents  of 
the  offices  mentioned  at  the  time  this  act  becomes  effective. 

SEC.  10.  That  sections  1697  and  1698  of  the  Revised  Statutes  aiv  hereby 
amended  to  read  as  follows : 

"Every  foreign-service  officer,  before  he  receives  his  commission  or  enters 
upon  the  duties  of  his  office,  shall  give  to  the  United  States  a  bond,  in  such 
form  as  the  President  shall  prescribe,  with  such  sureties,  who  shall  be  perma- 
nent residents  of  the  United  States,  as  the  Secretary  of  State  shall  approve, 
in  a  penal  sum  not  less  than  the  annual  compensation  allowed  to  such  officer, 
conditioned  for  the  true  and  faithful  accounting  for.  paying  over,  and  deliver- 
ing up  of  all  fees,  moneys,  goods,  effects,  books,  records,  papers,  and  other 
property  which  shall  come  to  his  hands  or  to  the  hands  of  any  other  i>erson 
to  his  use  as  such  officer,  under  any  law  now  or  hereafter  enacted  and  for  the 
true  and  faithful  performance  of  all  other  duties  now  or- hereafter  lawfully 
imposed  upon  him  as  such  officer:  Provided.  That  no  foreign-service  officer  shall 
be  required  to  give  more  than  one  bond,  which  bond  shall  cover  by  its  stipula- 
tions all  official  acts  of  such  officer,  whether  as  foreign-service  'officer  or  as 
secretary  in  the  Diplomatic  Service,  consul  general,  consul,  or  vice  consul. 
The  bonds  herein  mentioned  shall  be  depos  ted  with  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury." 

SKC.  11.  That  the  provisiu.  s  of  scct;on  4  of  the  Act  of  April  5,  1906.  relative 
to  consuls  general  at  lar-e  arc  hereby  made  applicable  to  foreign  service  in- 
spectors. 

SEC.  12.  That  the  provisions  of  sections  8  and  10  of  the  Act  of  April  f>.  19<X), 
relative  to  official  fees  and  the  method  of  accounting  therefor  are  hereby  ex- 
tended to  in.-lude  the  Diplomatic  Service. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES.  6 

SKC.  13.  That  the  President  is  hereby  authorized  to  grant  to  diplomatic  mis- 
sions and  consular  offices  representation  allowances  out  of  any  money  which 
may  be  appropriated  for  such  purpose  from  time  to  time  by  Congress,  the  ex- 
penditure of  such  representation  allowance  to  be  accounted  for  in  detail  to  the 
Department  of  State  quarterly  under  such  rules  and  regulations  as  the  Presi- 
dent may  prescribe. 

SEC.  14.  That  any  minister  or  foreign  service  officer  may  be  assigned  for 
duty  in  the  Department  of  State  without  loss  of  class  or  salary,  such  assign- 
ment to  be  for  a  period  of  not  more  than  three  years,  unless  the  public  interests 
demand  further  service,  when  such  assignment  may  he  extended  for  a  period 
not  to  exceed  one  year. 

SKC.  15.  That,  within  the  discretion  of  the  President,  foreign  service  offiers 
of  class  one  may  be  appointed  to  a<  t  as  commissioner,  chargei  d'affaires,  minister 
resident,  or  diplomatic  agent  for  such  period  as  the  public  interests  may  re- 
quire w.thout  loss  of  grade,  class,  or  salary. 

SEC.  1(5.  That  any  foreign  service  officer  of  whatever  class  detailed  for 
special  duty  outside  the  city  of  Washington  shall  be  paid  Iris  actual  and 
necrssary  expenses  for  subsistence  during  such  special  detail  not  exceeding 
an  average  of  $8  per  day :  /VonY'cW,  That  such  special  duty  shall  not  continue 
for  more  than  s  xty  days,  unless  in  the  case  of  international  gatherings,  con- 
gresses, or  conferences,  when  such  subsistence  expenses  shall  run  only  during 
the  life  of  the  international  gathering,  congress,  or  conference  and  the  neces- 
sary pe'-iod  of  transit  to  and  from  the  place  of  gathering. 

SEC.  17.  That  the  provisions  of  the  Act  approved  May  --.  1920,  entitled  "An 
Act  for  the  retirement  of  employees  in  the  classified  civil  service,  and  for  other 
purposes."  are  hereby  made  applicable  to  foreign  service  officers  with  the 
modifications  hereinafter  stated,  to  wit : 

(a)  The  age  of  retirement,  instead  of  70  years  as  provided  in  section  1  of 
the  said  Act.  shall  be  <:5  years  in  tbe  case  of  fore'gn  service  officers. 

(b)  The  maximum  and  minimum  amiuit'es  under  the  several  classes,  instead 
of  those  stipulated  in  section  2  of  the  said  Act,  shall  be  as  follows: 

Class  A.  maximum  annuity.  $4.800,  minimum  annuity  .$1.500;  class  B,  maxi- 
mum annuity  $4,400,  minimum  annuity,  SI .875:  class  C.  maximum  annuity 
S4.000.  minimum  annuity  $1,250;  class  D,  maximum  annuity  $3,GOO.  minimum 
annuity  $1.125;  class  E.  maximum  annuity  $3.200.  minimum  annuity  $1,000; 
class  F.  maximum  annuity  $2,800,  min'mum  annuity  $875. 

(c)  In  lieu  of  section  3  of  the  said  act  the  following  provision  shall  apply: 
That  for  the  purposes  of  this  act  the  period  of  service  shall  be  computed 

from  the  date  of  original  oath  of  office  as  secretary  in  the  diplomatic  service, 
consul  general,  consul,  vice  consul  of  career,  consular  assistant,  or  student 
interpreter,  and  shall  include  periods  of  service  at  different  times  in  either 
ihe  diplomat'c  or  Consular  Service,  or  while  on  assignment  to  the  Department 
of  State,  but  all  periods  of  separation  from  the  service  and  so  much  of  any 
period  of  leave  of  absence  as  may  exceed  six  months  shall  be  excluded  :  Pro- 
ri<le(L  That  service  in  the  Department  of  State  prior  to  appointment  as  a 
foreign  service  officer  may  be  included  in  the  period  of  service,  in  which  case 
the  officer  shall  pay  into  the  civil  service  retirement  and  disability  fund  a 
special  contribution  equal  to  5  per  centum  of  his  annual  salary  for  each  year 
of  such  employment  after  tlrs  act  goes  into  effect,  with  interest  thereon  to 
date  of  payment  compounded  annually  at  4  per  centum,  less  a  deduction  of 
the  amount  of  all  contributions  and  accrued  interest  thereon  previously  paid 
by  such  employee  into  the  civil  service  retirement  and  disability  fund  under  the 
act  of  May  22.  1920. 

(d)  Any  minister  or  person  hold'ng  any  official  position  in  the  Department 
of  State  at  the  time  this  act  becomes  effective  who  subsequent  to  November 
•JO.  19OO,  occupied  the  position  of  secretary  in  the  diplomatic  service  and  any 
foreign  service  officer  who  may  hereafter  be  promoted  to  the  grade  of  minister 
or  appo'nted  to  any  official  position  in  the  Department  of  State  shall  be  en- 
titled to  all  the  benefits  of  this  act  in  the  same  manner  and  under  the  same 
conditions  as  a  foreign  service  officer. 

(e)  The  rate  of  deduction  in  the  case  of  foreign  service  officers  shall  be 
a  sum  equal  to  5  per  centum  of  the  basic  salary. 

(f)  In  lieu  of  section  15  of  the  said  act  the  following  provision  shall  apply: 
That  there  is  hereby  authorized  to  be  appropriated,   from  any  moneys  in 

the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated,  the  sum  of  $50.000  for  the  payment 
of  annuities  provided  for  in  this  act  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1923. 


4  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Interior  shall  submit  annually  to  the  Secretary  of  .  • 
Treasury  estimates  of  the  appropriations  necessary  to  continue  this  act  in 
full  force  and  effect. 

SEC.  18.  That  all  provisions  of  law  heretofore  enacted  relating  to  secretaries 
In  the  diplomatic  service  and  to  consular  officers,  which  are  not  inconsistent 
with  the  provisions  of  this  act,  are  hereby  made  applicable  to  foreign  service 
officers  when  they  are  designated  for  service  as  diplomatic  or  as  consular 
officers;  and  that  all  acts  or  parts  of  acts  inconsistent  with  this  act  are  hereby 
repealed. 

SEC.  19.  That  all  money  heretofore  appropriated  for  the  diplomatic  and 
consular  service  of  the  United  States  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1923, 
is  hereby  reappropriated  and  made  available  for  the  same  year  for  the  foreign 
service  of  the  United  States  and  for  the  same  purposes  and  in  the  same 
amounts  as  first  appropriated. 

SEC.  20.  That  this  act  shall  take  effect  on  January  1,  1923. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  committee  will  kindly  come  to  order.  The  committee  was 
called  to  consider  Mr.  Rogers's  bill,  H.  It.  12543.  The  title  of  the  bill  is  "A  bill 
for  the  reorganization  and  improvement  of  the  foreign  service  of  the  United 
States,  and  for  other  purposes." 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Has  not  this  bill  been  reported? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Not  this  bill.  The  Secretary  of  State  is  here,  and  we  would 
like  very  much  to  hear  him  on  the  bill. 

STATEMENT   OF  HON.   CHARLES  EVANS   HUGHES,   SECRETARY   OF 

STATE. 

Mr.  COCKKAN.  Before  you  begin.  Mr.  Secretary,  would  you  mind  letting  us 
know  where  this  bill  differs  from  the  other  one? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  This  bill  relates  to  the  foreign  service.  The  other  bill  was 
to  authorize  appropriations.  This  is  an  entirely  different  bill  from  the  one  you 
have  in  mind.  Am  I  not  right  in  that?  % 

Mr.  ROGERS.  It  has  no  point  in  contact  with  the  other  bill. 

Mr.  ("'(>(  KUAN.  1  beg  your  pardon. 

Secretary  HUGHES.  Mr.  Chairman.  I  understand  that  the  bill  before  the  com- 
mittee is  House  bill  No.  12543.  This  bill  is  a  revision  of  the  bill  known  as 
House  bill  No.  17,  of  the  Sixty-seventh  Congress,  first  session,  introduced  by 
Mr.  Rogers  in  April,  1921.  The  present  bill,  No.  12543.  was  redrafted  after 
consultation  with  the  Department  of  State.  The  changes  that,  have  been  made 
In  the  bill  have  been  made  in  view  of  certain  recommendations  in  the  interest 
of  the  objects  of  the  previous  measure  which  were  suggested  by  the  Depart- 
ment of  State.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  original  bill  had  been  gone  over 
In  this  way  with  the  desire  to  secure  in  the  best  possible  manner  the  increased 
efficiency  of  our  foreign  service  I  took  the  liberty  of  sending  the  measure  to  the 
I'res.dent  for  his  suggestions  and  determination  with  regard  to  his  own  attitude 
as  to  the  bill.  The  President  examined  the  proposed  bill  and,  I  believe,  com- 
municated with  the  chairman  of  the  committee  in  both  Houses  to  the  effect  that 
the  purposes  of  the  bill  had  his  approval. 

I  desire  to  discuss  it,  of  course,  in  its  general  aspect,  and  then.it  will  be  quite 
appropriate  and  in  the  natural  course  ['or  the  committee  to  take  up  particular 
details  which  may  or  may  not  require,  in  its  judgment,  amendments  to  meet 
those  purposes  which  I  am  sure  all  of  us  cherish.  The  desire  is  to  have  an  im- 
proved foreign  service.  The  provisions  of  the  bill  are  in  the  interest  of  a 
broader  basis  for  the  selection  of  foreign  service  officers,  for  greater  flexibility 
in  appointment,  transfer,  and  general  supervision  of  the  service,  and,  of  course, 
in  those  and  in  other  respects  to  promote  the  efficiency  of  the  service. 

You  will  observe  that  in  section  2  of  the  bill  it  is  provide,!  "That  the  officers 
in  the  foreign  service  shall  hereafter  be  graded  and  classified  as  follows,  with 
the  salaries  of  each  class  herein  affixed  thereto,  ambassadors  and  ministers  as 
now  or  hereinafter  provided — foreign  service  officer,  class  one,  $9,000,  foreign 
service  officer,  class  two,  $8.000."  and  so  on  down  to  class  9.  $3,000. 

The  effect  of  that  provision,  if  enacted  into  law,  would  be  to  take,  for  the 
purpose  of  this  gradation,  the  salary  classification  of  our  present  consular  and 
diplomatic  officers  below  the  rank  of  minister  and  put  them  into  one  class,  called 
"  foreign  service  officers."  You  will  observe  that  this  provision  does  not  affect 
ambassadors  or  ministers  HOW  or  hereafter  api>ointed.  It  only  affects  the  grades 
of  the  Consular  or  Diplomatic  Service  below  the  rank  of  minister. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  5> 

In  order  that  you  may  understand  the  practical  bearing  of  the  salary  classifi- 
cation at  once,  before  I  proceed  to  discuss  the  merits  of  the  change  I  might  call 
your  attention  to  the  fact  that  at  present  we  have  in  the  Diplomatic  Service 
below  the  grade  of  ministers  four  classes ;  that  is,  diplomatic  secretaries,  with 
salaries  ranging  from  $2,500  to  $4,000.  In  the  Consular  Service  we  have  a  num- 
ber of  classes.  We  have  consuls  general  and  consuls  and  vice  consuls  of 
career  in  a  number  of  classes.  The  effect  of  this  provision  would  be  to  put  all 
these  officials  under  a  classification  by  the  President  into  these  grades  of  foreign 
service  officers. 

Mr.  COOPER.  May  I  ask  a  question?  It  will  not  interrupt  at  all,  seriously. 
The  consuls  to-day  have  no  diplomatic  functions,  and  to  combine  both  diplo- 
matic and  consular  service  under  one  title,  how  would  you  distinguish  consuls 
from  members  of  the  regular  diplomatic  forces  if  they  are  all  called  foreign 
service  officers  of  class  IV 

Secretary  HUGHES.  You  have  anticipated  me,  Mr.  Cooper,  in  what  I  was 
about  to  say  in  support  of  this  provision.  The  object  of  this  provision  is  two- 
fold— to  have  an  appropriate  basis  of  selection  by  an  improvement  in  the  oppor- 
tunities and  emoluments  of  the  service ;  and,  second,  to  have  a  greater  flexibility 
in  the  appointments  and  arrangements  of  the  service. 

In  the  first  place,  let  me  call  your  attention  to  what  the  bill  does  not  do. 
The  bill  does  not  make  a  diplomatic  officer  out  of  one  who  is  not  a  diplomatic 
officer.  A  diplomatic  officer  in  the  view  of  international  law  has  certain  im- 
munities and  we  can  not  change  those  by  statute.  In  other  words,  you  can 
not,  by  making  a  man  who  is  not,  from  the  standpoint  of  diplomatic  usage,  a 
diplomatic  officer,  you  can  not  make  him  a  diplomatic  officer  so  as  to  give  him 
or  entitle  him  to  recognition  and  immunities  which  go  with  the  diploma  tc 
appointment. 

Secondly,  the  President,  under  the  Constitution,  in  accordance  with  his 
authority,  will,  of  course,  appoint  counselors  and  secretaries  and  diplomatic 
persons  who  would  have  diplomatic  standing  and  who  would  have  the  function; 
associated  with  their  work.  •{Similarly  he  would  appoint  consuls  who  would 
have  the  work  which  consuls  have  had  to  do.  This  classification  into  foreign 
service  officers  simply  has  the  effect  of  a  gradation  for  the  purpose  of  establish- 
ing the  salary  relation  of  groups  of  men. 

Now,  I  have  said  that  there  were  two  reasons  for  that,  and  in  view  of  your 
question,  Mr.  Cooper,  I  will  discuss  the  reason  I  put  second  in  the  first  place ; 
that  is  greater  flexibility,  you  know ;  the  particular  duties  of  consular  officers. 

Since  1906  consular  officers  have  been  selected  in  the  Department  of  State, 
under  rules  prescribed  by  the  President,  upon  a  merit  basis.  Politics  have  been 
taken  out  of  the  Consular  Service  years  ago,  so  that  men  have  been  selected 
upon  an  examination  devised  in  the  department,  under  those  intimately  familiar 
with  the  necessities  of  the  work,  to  discover  the  applicant's  special  attention 
for  that  work.  Similarly,  since  1909,  we  have  had  diplomatic  secretaries  below 
the  rank  of  ministers  selected  upon  a  merit  basis  under  rules  prescribed  by 
the  President  for  the  determination  of  their  fitness  for  that  work.  In  1915  the 
practice  received  legislative  support  by  the  provision  that  secretaries  and  con- 
suls of  various  sorts  should  be  commissioned  to  a  class,  and  the  selection  should 
be  in  accordance  with  the  rules  prescribed  by  the  President.  Now,  while  there 
is  a  very  clear  distinction  between  the  Consular  Service  and  the  Diplomatic 
Service,  "each  conceived  simply  as  such,  you  have  in  both  cases  a  great  deal  of 
actual  work  which  does  not  differ  in  the  one  case  from  that  of  the  other.  For 
example,  you  have  consuls  in  many  places  where  there  are  no  ministers,  and 
they  keep  in  touch  with  affairs  and  they  will  advise  the  department  as  to 
the  course  of  events.  In  some  places  they  are  called  upon,  if  American  citizens 
get  into  trouble,  immediately  for  what  a  minister  might  be  called  upon  if  they 
were  at  a  place  where  a  minister  was  available. 

Again,  at  this  time,  with  economic  questions  so  closely  fitting  in  with  political 
questions — and  all  political  questions,  you  might  say  broadly,  have  some  economic 
aspect  or  some  economic  force  lying  back  of  them — diplomatic  officers  must 
acquaint  themselves  very  intimately  with  a  great  many  commercial  or  business 
or  economic  questions. 

Now.  selecting  young  men  on  a  merit  basis  through  examinations,  one  having 
applied  for  the  Consular  Service,  another  having  applied  for  the  Diplomatic 
Service,  you  get  men  who  have  had  training  in  language,  in  history,  in  the 
science  of  politics,  so  far  as  it  can  be  taught.  They  show  by  the'r  general 
knowledge  an  aptitude  for  the  foreign  service.  It  is  impossible,  however,  ac- 
curately to  foretell  just  what  that  man's  special  ability  should  lead  him  to  in 


b  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

the  future.  Consequently,  you  may  discover  in  the  Consular  Service  a  man 
who  ought  to  be  available  for  diplomatic  work.  His  work  shows  this,  his 
knowledge  and  his  experience  show  it.  In  other  words,  by  a  rigid  distinction 
between  the  two  classes  you  make  it  impossible  to  avail  yourselves  many  times 
of  a  service  which  would  be  of  great  importance  to  the  country,  which  has  a 
different  name  or,  in  a  broad  sense,  another  aspect.  You  will  tind  that  there 
is  a  diplomatic  agent  or  a  secretary  who  may  be  very  useful  as  a  diplomatic- 
agent  in  a  way.  but  yet  he  has  shown  by  his  experience  and  by  the  character  of 
his  work  that  there  are  places  in  the  Consular  Service  where  he  would  be  much 
better  employed  and  could  give  a  wider  play  to  his  natural  and  acquired 
ability.  Now,  what  is  the  sense  of  having  your  service  so  arranged  that  you 
can  not  adjust  this  within  reasonable  limits,  w'thin  constitutional  limits?  You 
should  have  a  class  that  you  can  qualify  as  such  and  then  have  an  interchange- 
ableness  which  is  of  the  greatest  importance  in  elliciency. 

I  have  not.  of  course,  any  desire  to  blur  the  distinction  between  the  Con- 
ular  Service  and  the  Diplomatic  Service,  hut  we  are  in  a  very  practical  world. 
We  want  to  have  the  foreign  service  of  the  United  States  as  well  equipped  as 
any.  and  the  way  to  have  that  is  to  have  a  service  by  which  you  can  draw  upon 
the  right  men  who  have  had  a  large  experience  in  one  class  of  work  or  another 
class  of  work,  and  who  are  fitted  for  a  certain  post,  to  serve  in  that  post.  That 
is  what  I  mean  by  flexibility. 

The  other  reason  that  I  gave  was  to  provide  an  appropriate  basis  of  selec- 
tion, or  a  field  of  selection.  Now.  you  will  observe  that  these  salaries  called 
for  in  the  bill  run  from  $9,000  to  $3.000.  or  from  $3.000  to  $9001).  In  the 
Consular  Service  we  have  at  this  time  two  consuls  general  at  $12.000 — one  in 
London  and  one  in  Paris.  We  have  our  Liverpool  consul  receiving  $8000. 
There  is  a  provision  in  the  bill  which  safeguards  dur'ng  their  terms  of  office 
the  present  incumbents.  As  to  reduction,  therefore,  there  would  be  a  reduc- 
tion of  these  highest  salaries,  because  The  highest  under  this  bill  would  be 
$9,000 :  but  the  reduction  would  not  be  effective  as  to  the  present  appointees 
because  of  the  saving  provision. 

In  regard  to  diplomatic  secretaries,  our  present  classification  gives  us  from 
su  ."(«>  to  $4.000.  The  new  classification  would  embrace  both  consuls  and  diplo- 
matic officers  and  the  classification  would  be  in  charge  of  the  President 
and  would  be  based  on  efficiency  and  experience,  and.  of  course,  a  considerable 
number  of  those  in  our  Consular  Service  would  go  into  the  higher  trrades.  It 
does  not  mean  that  there  would  be  a  general  elevation  of  diplomatic  secre- 
taries to  the  highest  grade.  It  does,  however,  mean  this,  that  you  would  democ- 
ratize the  selection  of  diplomatic  secretaries.  Now.  there  is  nothing  in  which 
I  am  more  interested  than  this.  Let  me  assure  you  this  has  no  political  or 
partisan  bearing  whatever. 

Mr.  COCKUAN.  Did  I  understand  that  these  two  officers — the  consuls  at  Liver- 
pool and  at  Paris,  the  present  incumbents — shall  finish  out  their  terms  and  not 
he  reduced  to  $!M!OMV 
Secretary  Hrcins.  Yes. 

This  is  not  a  matter  that  has  the  slightest  personal  tinge  to  it.  It  is  simply 
my  desire,  while  I  happen  to  be  spokesman  for  the  Department  of  State,  to  use 
my  influence  to  the  highest  degree  to  put  this  foreign  service  on  the  basis 
on  which  it  should  be.  We  have  to-day  more  than  twice  as  much  work  in  the 
Department  of  State  as  we  had  before  the  war.  It  is  not  only  double  in  volume 
but  far  more  important  with  respect  to  the  quality  of  the  work  demanded  be- 
cause of  the  problems  presented  in  every  part  of  the  world,  because  of  the 
intricacies  of  the  questions  left  by  the  war.  because  of  the  kaleidoscopic  char- 
acter of  conditions  all  over  the  world,  the  instability  which  is  unfortunately 
presented  to  us  in  many  parts  of  the  world.  You  have  the  minimum  of  diplo- 
matic service  required  when  you  have  the  maximum  of  stability.  You  have 
the  maximum  service  required  when  you  have  unstable  conditions,  new  devel- 
opments, and  a  constant  need  for  the  protection  of  American  interests. 

There  sire  some  who  have  had  the  idea  that  because  of  the  increase  in  the 
fac  lities  of"  intercourse — by  cable,  by  radio,  and  in  every  way  by  which  corn- 
nmnicatii  n  is  made  easy — the  importance  of  the  diplomatic  agent  is  diminished, 
That,  from  my  point  of  view,  is  a  very  erroneous  conception.  The  more  you 
develop  the  facilities  of  intercourse  the  more  you  develop  the  very  situation  in 
which  the  need  for  an  agency  is  increased,  because  you  multiply  the  opportuni- 
ties for  questions  to  arise.  There  is  not  any  business  house  of  importance  in 
the  United  States  who  in  any  matter  of  d  fliculty  will  send  a  "wire"  if  they 
can  send  a  man.  They  will  send  their  "  wire  '  and  the  man.  It  is,  of  course. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  7 

a  matter  familiar  to  everyone  who  has  had  any  wide  connection  with  affairs 
that  the  personal  contact  in  the  last  analysis  is  the  vital  and  determining  con- 
tact. I  might  send  an  instruction;  I  might  write  out  in  detail,  textually.  just 
what  is  to  be  said,  but  much  will  depend  upon  the  man  who  presents  that,  upon 
his  manner  and  his  exper.ence.  and  whether  he  is  persona  grata — whether  he 
is  a  man  who  has  won  the  esteem  and  confidence  of  the  foreign  office  with  which 
he  is  called  upon  to  deal. 

This  great  country  can  not  afford  to  be  represented  by  any  service  less  than 
the  best  attainable.  It  is  not  an  expensive  service.  When  we  consider  the 
responsibil.ties  resting  upon  the  Department  of  State,  the  vast  interests  of  our 
citizens  and  of  the  Nation  itself  that  are  at  stake,  I  think  it  is  the  least  expen- 
sive service  in  the  Government. 

Now,  what  do  you  need  to  make  this  service  more  efficient.  I  am  not  talking 
here  about  ambassadors  and  m  nisters.  It  will  not  be  for  a  moment  questioned 
that  we  ought  to  have  the  opportunity — that  the  President  should  have  the 
opportunity — to  call  distinguished  citizens,  men  of  wide  familiarity  with  busi- 
ness and  politics  and  att'a.rs.  well-read,  cultivated  men  whose  personality  gives 
prestige  to  their  country  wherever  they  may  be;  the  President  should  call  such 
men  to  service  at  foreign  posts,  particularly  at  the  more  important  posts.  But 
a  man  of  that  sort.  I  do  not  care  who  he  is,  can  not  function  without  a  staff. 
The  more  intelligent  he  is,  the  move  skillful  he  is,  the  more  he  appreciates  the 
necessity  of  that  staff.  Take  a  lawyer  in  a  busy  office  crowded  with  clients, 
at  the  Trout  rank  of  his  profession,  with  men  coming  to  him  with  the  most  im- 
portant concerns;  does  he  sit  there  as  a  repository  of  all  knowledge,  depend- 
ent upon  his  individual  efforts,  which  he  must  put  forth  between  calls  on  the 
telephone,  between  interviews?  He  has  a  trained  staff,  and  the  more  skillful 
and  able  he  is  the  better  staff  he  will  have,  not  to  supply  what  he  gives — no 
staff  can  do  that.  No  one  could  give  his  intell'gence,  his  acumen,  his  analysis, 
his  ability  to  deal  with  complicated  situations,  calling  to  his  aid  experiences 
which  others  know  nothing  of;  but  he  Vnust  have  the  technical  aid.  the  re- 
searches necessary  to  the  particular  case,  the  information  as  to  office  prece- 
dents as  to  all  the  matters  which  go  into  the  final  action  for  which  he  will  be 
responsible.  I  do  not  have  to  argue  that  to  men  of  affairs.  So  that  however 
skillful  or  able  the  ambassador  or  minister  may  be,  you  do  not  get  rid  of  the 
necess  ty  for  a  staff. 

What  should  that  s  aff  cons;st  of?  Of  course,  it  should  consist  of  men  who 
have  natural  aptitude  and  knowledge  of  languages.  I  think  our  ministers 
should  know  the  languages.  Certainly,  there  must  be  somebody  who  knows  the 
languages  of  the  countries  where  they  are,  and  who  knows  their  history,  knows 
all  those  things  which  constitute  the  "  common  law  "  of  any  office  or  any  de- 
partment. I  mean  by  that  the  world  of  things  that  have  been  done — the  rou'ine, 
the  hundreds  of  interviews,  the  revelations  of  attitudes,  disclosures  of  motives, 
expositions  of  personalities. 

To  accomplish  these  results-  you  must  have  men  of  career,  and  unless  you 
provide  for  the  career,  what  would  happen  to  a  young  man  who  enters  the 
service?  I  speak  now  candidly  and  directly  to  you:  what  do  you  offer  to  a 
young  man  who  has  no  fortune,  who  has  just  got  God-given  ab'lities  and  a 
desire  to  serve,  who  is  interested  in  interna'ional  relations,  who  has  the  qualifi- 
cations that  come  through  specializing  in  history,  in  languages,  and  in  study 
of  world  politics?  What  would  lead  him  to  enter  upon  a  diplomatic  career 
now,  when  all  that,  he  sees  before  h'm  is  a  salary  at  a  maximum  of  $4,000? 
He  knows,  however,  that  by  having  an  Executive  w7ho  is  keen  for  the  serv'ce 
of  the  country  he  may  have  a  remote  chance  to  get  an  appointment  as  minister. 
He  might  get  it.  but  in  the  main  he  can  not  look  forward  to  it,  and.  otherwise, 
be  has  got  there  a  limit  of  $4,000. 

I  do  not  go  at  all  upon  the  theory  that  men  of  spirit,  of  high  ideals,  are 
entirely  influenced  by  money  or  money  considerations.  It  would  be  a  sad  day 
for  the  country  if  our  best  young  men  had  no  o'her  ambition.  It  is  not  true 
that  they  have  no  other  ambition.  Of  course,  you  can  not  compete  w;th  what 
engineering  will  give  or  what  the  pract'ce  of  law  will  give,  or  what  the  practice 
of  medicine  will  give  to  the  brightest  minds.  It  would  be  folly  to  attempt  a 
thing  of  that  sort.  But  this  country  has  always  been  able  to  draw  upon  its 
best  blood  to  a  considerable  extent  because  of  the  desire  for  distinction,  the 
desire  for  cultural  opportunities,  for  the  relations  that  are  congenial,  because 
of  the  ideal  of  public  service  that  a  technical  opportunity  of  a  profess'onal 
sort  or  a  business  sort  might  not  sat'sfy.  That  is  the  reason  why  during  the 
last  generation,  or  two  generations,  when  America  has  jumped  forward,  when 
24470 22 2 


8  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UNiTED   STATES. 

great  fortunes  have  beeii  developed,  and  the  country  lias  expanded  in  every 
way.  that  you  have  had  men  in  the  schools,  in  the  church,  in  various  activities 
where  pecuniary  considerations  were  not  dominant.  Of  course,  our  colleges* 
have  had  to  meet  the  new  exigency;  they  have  had  to  readjust  their  salaries. 
Our  universities  have  had  to  meet  it.  We  have  had,  in  various  ways,  to  meet 
the  higher  expense  and  the  increased  competition  under  cond  tions  at  this  day. 
What  is  necessary  is  to  give  a  man  an  assurance  that  he  will  he  able,  at  least. 
to  live,  that  he  will  be  able  to  get  married,  that  he  will  be  able  to  support  him- 
self according  to  reasonable  and  modest  American  standards.  Is  it  too  much 
to  lay  down  the  maximum  for  the  very  best  at  $9,000.  at  this  time?  Well,  if 
1  thought  I  should  have  to  argue  that  question,  I  should  despair  of  any  con- 
sideration of  the  department.  It  can  not  be  possible  that  I  must  argue  this, 
that  for  a  man  who  has  chosen  this  career,  who  year  after  year  sees  his  friends 
at  college  get  rich  about  him;  a  maximum  of  $9,000  and  a  minimum  of  $3.000. 
should  be  considered  excessive.  The  maximum  will  only  be.  of  course,  t'or  the 
best  men  of  long  service.  It  runs  down  to  $3.000. 

It  is  not  a  good  thing  for  the  diplomatic  service  to  be  recruited,  even  on  a 
merit  basis,  exclusively  from  men  of  families  of  fortune  who  can  afford  the 
life  on  the  present  basis.  When  I  say  that,  I  want  to  say  that  I  am  the  last 
man  in  the  world  to  deny  the  fine  ambition,  the  qualificat'ons.  the  creditable 
work  of  our  young  men  of  families  of  fortune  who  have  not  tried  to  -idd  to 
their  pecuniary  competency  but  have  made  it  available  for  public  service.  I 
do  not  know  what  we  would  do  to-day  if  it  was  not  that  we  can  draw  upon  men 
who  not  only  have  had  the  advantages  of  culture  and  refinement,  but  who  have 
private  means  and  can  afford  to  enter  the  service  and  are  selected  because  of  their 
ability  and  not  because  of  any  fortune  they  may  have.  With  all  credit  to  them, 
however,  it  is  a  great  mistake,  utterly  undemocratic,  for  the  Government  to 
so  arrange  its  affairs  as  to  exclude  others. 

This  is  not  an  extravagant  proposal.  1  his  is  an  effort  to  make  a  reasonable 
classification  which  will  give  an  opportunity,  first,  to  put  men  where  experience 
shows  their  best  fitness  lies,  and  next  to  make  a  career  attractive  within  limits 
so  that  those  who  enter  the  service  may  feel  that  if  they  are  reasonable  and 
modest  that  they  can  get  along  just  as  our  boys  want  to  get  along  if  they  are 
normal ;  that  they  can  have  a  fair  livelihood  and  a  reasonable  position  in  the 
world. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  About  what  proportion  of  these  appointees  would  get  Hie 
highest? 

Secretary   HUGHES.  The  classification   is  left   entirely   to   the   President,     It 
is  all  classified  on  the  President's  responsibility  with  reference  t<>  fitness  and 
experience  in  the  service,  proved  ability,  etc. 
Mr.  COCKRAN.  There  is  not  any  fixed  number? 
Secretary  HUGHES.  No  fixed  number. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  The  President  can  expand  or  contract  that  whenever  and  as 
ne  chooses? 

Secretary  HUGHES.  Exactly  according  to  the  needs  of  the  service.  If  yon 
will  take  this  little  volume,  available  to  you  all,  the  "Diplomatic  and  Consular 
Services  of  the  United  States."  and  look  through  this  present  classification  of 
consuls  general  and  consuls,  vice  consuls,  consuls  of  career,  etc.,  you  will  see 
this,  if  you  will  permit  me:  There  are  two  consuls  general  of  class  1  at  $12.000 
each.  They  can  not  be  disturbed,  but  their  successors  would  get  S9.000. 
Mr.  COCKRAX.  Would  that  be  enough  for  London  and  Paris? 
Secretary  HUGHES.  I  think  it  is  unequal  as  it  is.  I  think  to  take  a  man— I 
will  not  mention  names,  because  I  am  very  glad  that  Mr.  Skinner,  one  of  the 
best  men  ever  in  the  Consular  Service,  sits  here,  and  I  will  not  go  into  names — 
but  take  a  case  like  Paris.  Suppose  you  take  the  diplomatic  end  of  it — and 
we  would  naturally  have  one  of  our  most  experienced  counsellors  in  the  service 
in  the  embassy,  of  the  highest  rank  next  to  the  ambassador — he  gets  $4,000. 
Across  the  street  is  a  consul  general  getting  $12,000.  We  have  only  two  places 
at  $12,000.  The  next  highest  is  $8,000.  This  would  give  an  elevation  of  the 
best  to  $9,000.  We  have  an  unequal  situation  now:  we  have  the  highest 
salaries  paid  to  the  consuls,  and  there  would  be  no  serious  increase  in  the 
higher  ranks.  So  far  as  the  consuls  are  concerned,  it  would  be  the  lower 
ranks  that  would  be  bellied:  and  in  the  Diplomatic  Service  only  those  would  lie 
brought  forward  who  have  special  ability  and  experience. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  I  am  not  at  all  alarmed  about  the  size  of  the  salaries.  I  do 
not  think  they  are  too  large,  from  my  point  of  view,  but  what  I  do  think,  and  it 
is  rather  striking — it  is  not  clear  to  me — is  why  the  reduction  of  these  two 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  9 

consulates.  By  reason  of  their  size  I  think  there  is  twice  as  much  business 
there  as  at  any  other  agency,  and  yet  they  are  reduced  from  $12,000  to  $9,000. 

Secretary  HUGHES.  I  am  not  sure  about  that.  How  about  Liverpool?  That 
is  $8,000. 

Mr.  COCKKAX.  I  am  speaking  about  London;  you  know  better  than  I. 

Secretary  HUGHES.  I  know  it  is  very  large. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  What  strikes  me.  which  has  not  been  quite  explained  by  your 
address  so  far.  is  why  they  should  be  reduced. 

Secretary  HUGHES.  The  present  incumbents  are  not  reduced. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  I  am  speaking  of  the  office. 

.Secretary  HUGHES.  The  others  are  reduced  only  in  the  interest  of  the  broader 
classification  that  is  deemed  to  be  just.  Now,  if  the  committee  wanted  to  put 
them  all  up,  I  do  not  object. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  I  mean  those  two  offices  at  London  and  Paris,  not  Liverpool. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  That  would  be  a  matter  for  us  to  determine  in  executive 
session. 

Secretar  HUGHES.  Mr.  Carr  calls  my  attention  to  the  fact  that  our  highest 
salary  of  a  minister  is  $10,000,  and  in  relation  to  that  it  was  deemed  just  that 
there  should  not  be  any  consul  higher  than  a  minister.  That  is  a  matter  of 
good  judgment  in  the  arrangement.  I  am  not  a  stickler  for  particular  amounts, 
so  long  as  I  carry  this  principle  fairly  into  application. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  All  I  want,  Mr.  Secretary,  is  to  get  your  view  as  to  whether 
there  is  any  particular  reason  why  these  men  should  be  reduced,  whether  they 
get  too  much  now? 

Secretary  HUGHES.  It  is  deemed  to  be  a  fair  arrangement  all  around. 

We  have  another  provision  in  this  bill  that  is  important.  I  can  not  go  into  an 
analysis  of  it  as  fully  as  I  should  like  to,  but  you  will  consider  it  very  carefully 
with  all  the  details  before  you.  That  is  the  retirement  feature.  We  have  a 
general  retirement  measure  for  civil-service  employees.  We  have  retirement  in 
the  Army  and  Navy,  but.  in  the  Diplomatic  Service,  all  you  can  do  when  a 
man  has  served  his  country  for  a  very  long  time  is  to  put  him  out  or  else 
continue  him  at  the  expense  of  the  country  in  a  position  which  he  is  no  longer, 
on  account  of  his  age  and  on  account  of  his  wearing  out  in  the  service  of  the 
country,  perfectly  fitted  to  hold. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  What  section  is  that? 

Secretary  HUGHES.  The  retirement  provision  will  be  found  on  pages  8  and  9. 
You  will  notice  that  this  is,  in  a  general  way,  adapted  to  the  standards  of  the 
retirement  act  of  1920,  with  certain  modifications. 

The  first  modification  relates  to  age.  The  age  is  made  65,  of  course,  subject 
to  the  number  of  years  in  the  service,  instead  of  age  70.  The  reason  is  that 
in  the  more  or  less  routine  positions  under  the  civil-service  regulation  to  which 
the  act  of  1920  applies,  the  man  may  be  quite  as  useful,  if  not  more  useful,  at 
70  than  a  man  would  be  at  65  in  the  Diplomatic  or  Consular  Service.  This  is 
subject  to  length  of  service,  the  number  of  years  of  service  involved. 

The  hext  point  is  that  the  contribution,  as  shown  on  p.".ge  10,  from  salaries 
is  .1  per  cent  instead  of  2i  per  cent. 

Then  the  other  main  modification  is  as  shown  on  page  9,  in  the  maxima 
and  min-iina.  Class  A,  which  is  based  on  class  A  of  the  act  of  1920,  is  put 
at  the  maximum  of  $4,800,  and  a  minimum  of  $1,500.  Class  B  has  a  maximum 
of  *4,400,  and  a  minimum  of  $1,375;  class  C  has  a  maximum  of  $4,000.  and  a 
minimum  of  $1.250;  and  so  on  down  to  class  F,  which  has  a  maximum  of 
$2.800,  and  a  minimum  of  $875.  The  various  classes,  I  suppose  you  may  have  in 
mind,  but,  as  we  do  not  profess  to  carry  with  us  all  these  statutory  provisions, 
I  may  briefly  refer  to  the  fact  that  under  the  act  of  1920.  class  A  includes  all 
employees  who  have  served  for  a  total  of  30  years  or  more,  and  class  B  those 
who  have  served  for  a  total  of  27  years  and  less  than  30  years.  Class  C  in- 
cludes those  who  have  served  for  a  total  of  24  years  and  less  than  27  years. 
Class  I)  includes  those  who  have  served  for  a  total  of  21  years  and  less,  than 
24*  years,  and  class  E  those  who  have  served  for  a  total  of  IS  years  and  less 
than  21  years.  Class  F  includes  those  who  have  served  for  a  total  of  15  years 
anil  less  rhan  18  years. 

The  actual  operation  of  the  act,  as  I  understaivd  it,  from  the  figures  supplied 
nu-  by  Mr.  Carr.  and  I  need  not  tell  you  how  much  I  value  Mr.  Carr's  experience 
and  services  in  the  matter,  is  that  there  will  be  an  initial  contribution  required 
for  Ibis  purpose  from  the  Government  of  about  $50.000.  and  that  according  to 
the  expectation  this  is  all  that  will  be  required  until  1943.  Then  the  amount 
would  gradually  increase  until  it  would  reach  its  peak  about  1958.  The  ad- 


U  FOREIGN   SKRVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

justnients  to  which  I  have  referred  would  cause  an  increase  in  appropriations 
of  approximately,  as  figured,  $578,500,  divided  as  follows:  About  .$267,000  is 
in  the  Diplomatic  Service,  and  about  ,$201,500  is  ii>  the  Consular  Service  and  re- 
tirement system,  initial  cost  of  ,$.">0,000,  against  which  there  would  be  a  saving 
ii>  the  post  allowances  leaving  the  estimate  at  $378,500. 

With  regard  to  allowances  there  is  a  provision  in  the  law  that  where  there 
are  particular  conditions  in  places,  differences  in  exchange,  a  difference  in 
economic  condit.ons,  which  make  the  grade  salary  not  adequate,  the  President 
caiv  allow  sums,  of  course,  to  be  appropriated  by  Congress,  for  that  purpose. 

I  thank  you  for  your  attention.  I  have  discussed  the  bill  in  a  broad  way 
and  I  submit  it  for  your  consideration. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  am  in  entire  accord  with  everything  you  have  said.  In 
fat,  I  am  delighted  to  know  that  the  department  has  taken  this  position.  Can 
you  give  us  an  approximate  estimate  of  the  amount  this  bill  would  increase 
the  expenditures? 

Secietary  Hrc;m:s.  Just  what  I  have  said. 

The  CHAIKMAX.  Only  .$:>78,<M!0. 

Secretary  HUGHES.  Yes. 

The  CHAIKMAX.  Last  year  the  Consular  Service  was  self-sustaining,  accord- 
ing to  Mr.  Carr. 

Secretary  Hr<;iu:s.  Thai  is  i.n  account  of  the  passport  fees. 

The  CHAIUMAX.  That  is  what  I  am  coming  to.  The  increased  passport  and 
vise,  fees  have  made  the  foreign  service  practically  self-sustaining,  have  they 
not ': 

Secretary  HroiKs.  That  was  true  a  year  ago;  but  the  income  has  been  re- 
duced from  that  source.  1'ersoiially,  I  should  like  to  see  the  passport  and  vise 
fees  eliminated  or  reduced  to  a  minimum,  because  I  think  they  are  tirst-class 
nuisances.  Every  once  in  a  while  I  see  that  the  Department  of  State  is  getting 
letters,  and  I  see  articles  in  the  newspapers,  to  the  effect  that  the  Department 
of  State  is  keeping  the  passport  fees  up.  Of  course,  that  is  a  congressional 
matter,  and  we  can  not  waive  the  passport  fee.  It  would  be  of  great  interest 
to  business  and  would  aid  in  the  freedom  of  intercourse  if  these  difficulties  in 
travel  that  some  of  us  were  wholly  unfamiliar  with  in  the  halcyon  days  before 
the  war  could  be  gotten  rid  of.  P>ut  we  do  not  require  passports  from  citizens 
of  this  country.  They  have  to  have  them  because  they  can  not  get  into  other 
countries  without  them.  It  is  in  deference  to  the  other  countries.  In  the  aid 
of  our  immigration  act.  we  have  to  have  vise  requirements  <>n  the  other  side. 
On  account  of  the  reduction  to  some  extent  of  the  income  from  passport  and 
vise  fees,  it  can  not  be  said  that  we  are  really  completely  self-supporting. 
Now.  while  we  have  got  quite  an  amount  of  income,  we  cost  quite  a  little. 
Here  is  the  situation,  if  you  want  to  know  what  we  cost  under  the  current 
year.  Here  is  the  current  year. 

Mr.  BURTON.  The  fiscal  year  or  the  calendar  year'.- 

Secretary  lire  HI  s.  The  current  fiscal  year  1922-23.  We  have  three  items 
in  which  our  appropriations  are  grouped.  Our  items  of  expense  are  grouped 
in  three  items,  leaving  out  the  various  expenditures  called  for  by  treaties,  etc. 
I  refer  to  those  hist  items  because,  for  example,  this  year  we  have  .$."<)<  Ml.OOO 
for  Colombia  and  s2.~>0.000  for  Panama,  and  also  various  other  obligations. 
Those  items  come  under  what  we*  call  "foreign  intercourse."  but  they  do  not 
reflect  expenditures  of  the  service  as  such.  The  expenditures  of  the  service  as 
such  are  for  the  Diplomatic  Service,  the  Consular  Service,  and  the  Department 
of  State.  The  appropriations  for  the  Diplomatic  Service  for  the  current  year 
were  S2.'.i!>4  ."07  :  for  the  Consular  Service  as  s."  .").•!!. 4<:o ;  and  for  the  Depart- 
ment of  State,  .$1.185,033. 

Let  me  pause  to  tell  you  that  is  what  the  department  down  here  on  the 
American  side  of  the  line  costs  you — .Sl.isn  (MM).  That  makes  a  total  of 
s:t.711.<MM).  Now.  against  that  we  have  collected  fees,  and  our  estimate  this  year 
of  fees,  amounting  to  si;.  104  <><;<).  which  leaves  us  a  net  cost  of  about  .$:',.( 500.000. 
I  have  here  a  comparison  between  that  cost  and  that  of  Great  Kritain.  Ours 
was  S:>.711.<MHt.  theirs  .S12.244.<MM>  a  difference  of  about  S2.r.<xt.i>:x).  We  have. 
of  course,  a  much  larger  amount  of  fees.  Their  net  cost  is  Sx.:;oo.iMM)  and  ours 
is  s:;.rn  I.UMI.  I  do  not  think  much  of  the  fee  end  of  it.  because,  as  I  say.  that 
is  a  temporary  matter. 

Mr.  MOOHK  of  Virginia.  Is  there  anyone  here  who  can  compare  this  plan  with 
the  plan  in  effect  in  England  and  France? 

Secretary  HTCHKS.  Yes.  Here  is  Mr.  Skinner,  who  knows  everything  about 
England,  and  lure  is  Mr.  Carr,  who  knows  everything  about  the  Consular 


FOREIGN   SERVICE    OF   THE    UNITED   STATES.  ll 

Service  everywhere,  and  here  is  Mr.  Lay,  who  has  just  left  the  room  because 
he  is  too  modest  to  hear  my  commendation  of  him. 

Mi'.  MOORE  of  Virginia.  I  suppose  the  Department  of  Commerce  would  very 
cordially  approve  this  effort  to  strengthen  our  Consular  Service. 

Secretary  HUGHES.  Yes,  I  think  so.  Let  me  speak  a  word  about  that.  There 
is  no  difficulty  between  the  Department  of  State  and  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce. We  are  cooperating  together.  We  appreciate  each  other's  aid.  In 
what  I  am  about  to  say  I  know  there  would  be  no  objection,  and  there  could 
not  be  upon  the  merits.  When  you  come  to  deal  with  governments  you  must 
have  a  unified  service;  this  is  absolutely  necessary.  You  have  got  to  ap- 
proach governments  through  a  regular  agency,  and  the  only  question  is  whether 
you  will  have  two  bridges  or  one.  It  will  be  fatal  to  divide  that  responsibility. 
Getting  information,  helping  trade,  dealing  with  all  the  activities  essential  to 
the  extension  of  commerce,  are  of  the  utmost  importance  and  I  should  be  the 
last  to  minimize  their  importance.  But  when  you  come  to  dealing  with  govern- 
ments, there  must  be  a  single,  undivided  control. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  You  alluded  toward  the  end  of  your  remarks  to  the  matter  of 
representation  allowances.  I  suppose  that  is  the  new  name  for  what  we  have 
known  for  some  years  as  post  allowances. 

Secretary  HUGHES.  I  suppose  that  we  have  had  under  two  names  expenses 
of  certain  sorts,  such  as  jiost  allowances  made  in  various  appropriations.  But 
to  answer  your  question,  representation  allowances  would  meet  the  need  now 
covered  by 'post  allowances,  as  I  understand  it.  and  is  a  substitute. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  The  post  allowance  practice  has  been  always  looked  at  askance 
by  the  Members  of  the  House,  not  so  much  by  this  committee  as  by  the  larger 
body,  which  perhaps  has  not  looked  so  carefully  into  the  matter.  It  occurs  to 
me  that  you  might  advantageously  indicate  for  their  benefit  a  little  more  fully 
why  you  think  it  desirable  that  there  should  be  the  principle  of  representation 
allowances  in  legislative  form.  It  might  help  the  committee  and  the  House. 
Secretary  HUGHES.  I  shall  be  very  glad  to  do  that.  It  is  impossible  in  any 
fixed  schedule  of  salaries  to  reflect  the  economic  condition  of  the  posts.  You 
have  differences  in  exchange,  differences  in  the  cost  of  living ;  you  have  a  variety 
of  differences  in  representation  which  have  got  to  be  met.  or  you  do  not  carry 
out  the  promise  of  your  own  bill :  and  there  must  be  some  way  of  equalizing 
these  differences.  It  can  only  be  done  by  appropriation.  Congress  has  always 
controlled  the  amount  that  shall  be  allowed.  But  the  legislative  bas's  should 
not  be  so  expressed  as  to  preclude  the  making  of  the  appropriate  allowances 
which  will  enable  the  mission  to  serve.  That  is  what  you  mean  ;  is  it  not? 
Mr.  ROGERS.  Yes. 

Mr.  FISH.  If  compatible  with  the  public  interest,  can  you  make  a  brief  state- 
ment here  to  the  committee  in  regard  to  American-owned  embassies? 
Secretary  HUGHES.  That  is  not  in  this  bill. 

Mr.  FTSH.  No,  but  that  is  something  before  the  committee,  generally  speak- 
ing. It  is  a  matter  in  which  the  committee  is  interested. 

Secretary  HUGHES.  Of  course,  I  am  vitally  interested  in  it.  But  I  should 
like  to  speak  to  a  point  or  a  bill,  if  there  is  one. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  There  is  no  bill  pending.  Mr.  Secretary.  The  act  of  1910 
created  the  commission. 

Secretary  HUGHES.  You  have  a  commission? 
Mr.  FISH.  The  Secretary  is  on  the  commission. 
Secretary  HUGHES.  I   am   represented   there. 
The  CHAIRMAN.  You  are  one  of  the  commission. 

Secretary  HUGHES.  I  am  represented  by  Mr.  Bliss.  Now,  Mr.  Fish  I  am 
most  earnestly  in  favor  of  that.  Of  course,  unless  a  man  goes  abroad,  and 
goes  several  times,  and  knows  conditions  on  the  other  side  in  an  intimate 
way,  he  finds  it  very  difficult  to  understand  the  demands  in  that  respect  of 
the  Diplomatic  Service.  One  of  the  most  essential  factors  in  successful  in- 
ternational intercourse  is  prestige.  That  does  not  mean  an  extravagant,  an 
undemocratic  outlay.  But  it  does  mean  a  relative  position  of  dignity  worthy 
of  the  country.  You  might  send  a  very  distinguished  American  over  there, 
so  distinguished  that  he  might  live  in  a  hall  bedroom,  carry  his  papers  in  a 
grip  to  the  foreign  office,  but.  if  he  did,  every  one  would  commiserate  his 
country.  Every  man  who  saw  such  a  condition  would  realize  that,  while 
individually  he  enjoyed  the  prestige  to  which  his  ability  and  attainments 
entitled  him,  his  country  was  sacrified  and  humiliated  because  its  representa- 
tive was  treated  in  such  an  outrageous  fashion.  This  is  not  for  the  man ; 
it  is  for  the  country. 


12  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

Now,  then,  what  are  you  to  doV  You  ought  to  have  a  place  for  our  am- 
bassadors and  ministers  to  live.  Of  course.  I  have  been  talking  about  secre- 
taries and  consuls.  But.  when  you  come  to  ministers  and  ambassadors,  you 
have  a  very  different  situation  in  most  cases  unless  men  have  considerable 
fortunes.  It  is  a  sad  thing  that  there  are  few  men  who  are  available  for 
the  higher  posts,  and  that  they  can  not  make  good  unless  they  have  incomes 
far  in  excess  of  any  salaries  which  the  law  would  afford.  You  can  help  out 
by  at  least  giving  our  representative  a  home ;  giving  him  a  place  to  live,  putting 
him  in  the  same  position  as  others.  Why  should  the  American  Government, 
standing  out  supreme  before  the  world  because  of  its  resources,  why  must  it 
go  about  its  business  in  foreign  capitals  in  a  shame-faced  and  humilitating 
fashion,  because  of  inferior  equipment?  Protect  the  Government  from  waste- 
ful outlays.  I  am  for  that  strongly,  but  do  not  hurt  your  Government  by 
foolish  economies. 

STATEMENT   OF   MR.   ROBERT  P.   SKINNER,   CONSUL   GENERAL  OF 
THE  UNITED  STATES,  LONDON,  ENGLAND. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  State  your  full  name  and  occupation. 

Mr.  SKIXXKR.  Robert  1*.  Skinner.  American  consul  general.  London.  England. 
Gentlemen.  I  did  not  anticipate,  in  coming  here  this  morning,  that  I  should 
have  the  privilege  of  following  the  Secretary  of  State,  and  I  have  not  prepared 
any  general  statement  on  this  subject,  having  .just  arrived  from  London  yes- 
terday evening.  I  have  been  much  interested  in  this  bill  from  its  incep- 
tion and  1  regard  it  as  the  most  important  constructive  measure  thus  far 
suggested  in  connection  with  the  foreign  service  of  the  United  States.  Mr. 
Hughes  has  already  mentioned  to  you  the  obstacles  to  securing  the  talent  that 
we  require  for  the  foreign  service,  chief  among  them  being  the  impossibility 
of  offering  more  than  a  very  unsatisfactory  salaried  position.  It  is  with  great 
difficulty  that  our  young  men  maintain  abroad  the  position  which  they  should. 
and  we'  have  seen  it  over  and  over  again  that  men  introduced  into  the  Con- 
sular Service  are  picked  off  by  the  great  commercial  interests,  to  its  serious 
detriment.  It  has  become,  therefore,  of  the  utmost  importance  that  we  should 
make  the  career  sufficiently  attractive  to  enable  men  to  continue  in  it.  I 
myself  foresee  the  time  when  the  legal  distinctions  which  now  exist  between 
the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Service  will  largely  disapi>ear.  They  should 
disappear,  for  they  belong  to  other  times  and  other  conditions. 

From  my  own  point  of  view,  the  time  may  come  in  London,  let  us  say.  when 
one  roo:  might  very  advantageously  cover  all  activities  of  the  Government  of 
the  United  States,  with  the  ambassador  at  their  head  and  with  as  many  compart- 
ments as  you  choose,  each  one  dealing  with  its  own  special  branch  of  the  work. 
At  the  present  t  me  we  have  a  divided  authority,  the  ambassador  representing 
the  collective  interests  of  the  country  and  the  consul  general  representing  more 
particularly  its  individual  or  private  interests.  We  have  in  London  at  the 
present  time  half  a  dozen  activities  of  the  United  States  Government  n  various 
parts  of  the  city,  each  one  separated  from  the  others  by  shadowy  distinctions 
which  would  tend  to  disappear  should  this  bill  pass,  so  that  in  time  we  should 
come  to  an  elastic  and  symmetr  cal  organization. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Will  you  name  for  us  these  six  activities  in  London? 
Mr.  SKIXXKR.  We  have  the  Diplomatic  Service,  properly  speaking,  which  is 
located  at  4  Grosvenor  Gardens. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Have  we  left  that  place  in  Victoria  Street? 
Mr.  SKINNFR.  Yes.  Shortly  be  .'ore  the  war  began  that  office  was  closed. 
The  consul  general  is  at  38  Cavendish  Square.  The  Treasury  Department  is  at 
4  Haymarket.  Then  we  have  the  United  States  Sh  pping  Board  at  10  Gros- 
venor Gardens,  and  the  military  and  naval,  agricultural,  and  commercial  at- 
taches at  6  Grosvenor  Gardens.  We  also  have  the  dispatch  agency  at  No.  G. 
and  the  embassy  proper  at  No.  4. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  They  are  all  under  separate  roofs,  are  they? 
Mr.  SKINNER.  No;  under  five  different  roofs,  not  counting  the  ambassador's 
place  of  residence. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  mean  that  we  maintain  four  separate  and  distinct  estab- 
lishments. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes.  Shortly  before  I  left  London  Mr.  Harvey  was  much  inter- 
ested in  the  conception  of  having  all  the  activities  under  one  roof.  Whether 
that  would  be  practicable  or  not  remains  to  be  seen. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  It  would  certainly  reduce  the  overhead. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  13 

Mr.  SKINNKI;.  It  would  reduce  the  overhead  quite  considerably.  The  entire 
business  would  be  drawn  together.  The  idea  was,  when  I  left*  London,  that 
possibly  in  the  distant  future  we  might  secure  a  row  of  buildings  in  connection 
with  the  new  embassy  in  Prince's  Gate. 

Mr.  FISH.  Have  we  actually  taken  over  that  building.  Mr.  Morgan's  former 
residence? 

Mr.  SKIXNER.  It  is  actually  owned  by  the  United  States  Government  at  the 
present  time. 

Mr.  FISH.  We  have  moved  into  it? 

Mi-.  SKIXXEU,  Not  yet.  The  alterations  have  not  been  begun.  I  do  not  know 
much  about  that.  I  know  the  building  belongs  now  to  the  United  States 
Government ;  the  title  vests  in  the  Government.  The  money  has  been  appro- 
priated and  the  plans  have  been  worked  out.  That  will  be  the  ambassadorial 
residence. 

Mr.  FISH.  You  do  not  know  whether  we  have  moved  in  yet? 
Mr.  SKIXXKK.  No.     It  is  unoccupied. 

Mi-.  FISH.  Can  you  inform  the  committee  when  they  will  be  apt  to  move  in? 
Mr.  SKIXXKIS.  I  have  no  nneans  of  knowing.     It  is  a  matter  which  does  not 
fall   under  my  jurisdiction   in  any   way   whatever;   I   know  nothing  about  it 
except  that  they  have  not  yet  moved  in. 

Mr.  FISH.  That  work  has  been  going  on.  It  is  several  years  since  Congress 
.accepted  the  gift. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  The  delay  in  some  degree  arose  because  the  appropriation  for 
modernizing  and  furnishing  the  house  did  not  become  available  until  the  1st 
of  July  of  this  year. 

Mr.  COOPER.  How  much  land  is  there  about  the  residence  not  covered  by  the 
residence? 

Mr.  SKIXNKR.  There  is  a  small  garden  space,  possibly  six  or  seven  times  the 
area  of  this  room  to  the  rear,  and  then  there  are  certain  rights  to  a  large 
garden  which  runs  the  whole  length  of  the  entire  block  of  buildings,  of  which 
the  new  embassy  is  only  one. 

Mr.  COOPER.  There  is  ample  surface  for  additional  buildings  if  we  want  to  put 
them  adjoining  the  embassy? 

Mr.  BURTON.  It  would  not  be  entirely  available  for  business;  it  is  a  resi- 
dential section  quite  remote. 

Mr.  SKIXNKR.  The  building  laws  in  London  are  probably  of  such  a  nature 
that  it  would  not  be  possible  to  cover  much  more  ground  than  is  now  covered 
by  the  existing  structure,  but  it  would  be  possible  to  buy  adjoining  buildings,  as 
many  as  might  be  necessary.  The  objection  to  that  would  be.  from  the  consular 
point  of  view,  that  it  would  take  our  special  activity  too  far  away  from  the 
business  center. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Where  is  the  commercial  attach^  located? 
Mr.  SKIXXF.R.  No.  6  Grosvenor  Gardens. 

The  CHAIRMAX.  Are  the  military  and   ntival   attaches  there  also? 
Mr.  SKIXNKR.  Yes;  they,  together  with  the  representative  of  the  Department 
of  Agriculture  and  the  dispatch  agency  occupy  one  building  together. 
The  CHAIRMAN.  They  are  all  separate  organizations. 

Mr.  SKINXKR.  They  are  separate  organizations — all.  however,  working  in  the 
most  complete  harmony  and.  to  a  degree,  under  the  direction  of  the  ambassa- 
dor. While  organically  the.e  is  no  connection  between  these  various  institu- 
tions, because  the  requirements  of  the  United  States  Government  are  such  as 
they  are  they  are  all  working  together  in  harmony  and  under  the  super'or 
direction  of  the  ambassador.  It  necessarily  works  out  that  way.  You  can  not 
have  a  dozen  heads;  you  have  got  to  have  one  head.  We  receive  our  inspira- 
tion from  on  high,  and  each  one  accord'ng  to  his  lights  and  opportunities  does 
the  best  he  can  to  carry  out  his  part  of  the  work. 
The  CHAIRMAX.  Proceed. 

Mr.  SKIXXER.  As  Mr.  Hughes  so  well  expressed  it  a  feAv  moments  ago,  there 
is  a  very  shadowy  distinction  between  the  diplomatic  and  the  consular  work. 
As  I  see  it.  the  consular  establ  shment  constitutes  what  I  might  call  the  court 
of  first  instance.  We  get  the  case  in  the  first  place.  The  man  who  finds  him- 
self in  difficulty  first  communicates  w'th  the  consul,  and  the  consul  does  the 
best  he  can  with  the  situation,  and  be  may  settle  it  or  may  not.  If  he  does  not 
settle  it.  he  appeals  to  the  embassy,  and  the  embassy  tries  its  hand:  ami  if 
the  required  adjustment  fails  of  realization  there,  then  it  goes  to  the  Depart- 


14  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

meut  of  State,  so  that   it  is  extremely  difficult    to   say    where  one  branch  of 
the  work  begins  and  the  other  terminates. 

Mr.  COCKUAX.  The  commercial  work  is  entirely  distinct. 

Mr.  SKIXNKR.  Yes  and  no.  If  you  refer  to  the  granting  of  invoices  and  other 
formal  papers,  the  consul's  work  is  carried  on  independently  of  any  other  branch 
of  the  service.  If  yon  refer  to  commercial  inquiries  and  the  like,  it  is  fre- 
quently the  case  that  the  embassy  and  consulate  general  cooperate  quite 
actively. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  He  verities  every  invoice? 

Mr.  SKIXXER.  Yes:  but  that  is  possibly  the  least  onerous  part  of  the  consul's 
duties.  In  London  any  morning  you  wil'l  see  hundreds  of  messenger  boys  pass- 
ing before  the  window  putting  their  papers  through  and  coming  back  in  the 
afternoon  to  receive  the  finished  documents,  and  during  the  interval  the  various 
clerks  make  numerous  book  entries.  It  all  passes  along  very  simply  and 
quickly. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  Is  there  not  a  verification  of  the  statements,  or  anything  of 
that  kind? 

Mr.  SKIXXER.  We  have  such  a  volume  of  business  in  London  that  it  would  be 
humanely  impossible  for  our  staff  to  go  into  each  particular  invoice,  but  we 
perform  a  very  useful  service.  Perhaps  our  most  useful  service  in  that  con 
nectiou  is  to  see  that  the  invoice  is  made  out  in  a  technically  correct  manner 
\Ve  see  that  the  invoice  is  legibly  prepared,  made  on  strong  paper,  that  the 
statement  of  costs  and  all  that  sort  of  thing  is  prepared,  so  that  when  these 
documents  reach  New  York — they  may  come  from  Czechoslovakia  or  from  some 
other  part  of  the  world — and  appear  before  the  appraisers,  who  may  or  may 
not  be  familiar  with  the  usages  and  languages  in  those  countries,  they  have  a 
document  with  which  they  are  familiar  and  know  how  to  use.  In  London  we 
have  a  special  arrangement  with  the  Treasury  attached  who  calls  every  day 
and  looks  through  our  invoice  book  and  picks  out  those  special  invoices  which 
appear  to  be  of  interest  to  us  or  to  him,  and  he  makes  a  very  close  inquiry 
and  reports  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  or,  rather,  to  the  Board  of 
Appraisers  of  the  Port  of  New  York. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  is  a  very  important  feature  of  .your  work. 

Mr.  SKIXXER.  That  is  a  very  important  feature  of  the  work  going  on  all  the 
time. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  You  may  have  observed  an  inquiry  I  addressed  to  Mr.  Hughes. 
About  what  is  the  volume  of  business  that  goes  through  your  office  in  a  year? 

Mr.   SKINNER.  Expressed   in  fees? 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Not  particularly  in  fees,  but  the  volume  of  merchandise. 

Mr.  MOORES.  The  value  of  the  invoices. 

Mr.  COCKKAX.  The  value  of  these  invoices? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Sometimes  as  much  as  10.000,000  pounds  a  month.  In  Novem- 
ber. 1922.  it  was  2.572.042  pounds. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  $50,000.000  a  month.    That  is  $600,000,000  a  year. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  It  varies  greatly.  For  11  months  of  1922  it  was  approximately 
31,000,000  pounds. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  requires  an  enormous  staff. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  We  have  a  staff  in  London  of  approximately  ">.">  persons. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Any  negligence  or  incapacity  on  the  part  of  those  officers. 
subordinates,  would  result  in  very  heavy  loss  to  the  Government,  would  it  not 
expose  our  Government  to  quite  heavy  loss? 

Mr.  SKIXNER.  Of  course,  inaccurate  work  on  the  part  of  our  representatives 
might  undoubtedly  result  in  heavy  losses  to  the  Unite. 1  States  Government. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  So  the  consul  at 'the  head  of  that  office  passing  on  >WO  mn.nito 
of  merchandise  in  a  year  is  really  responsible  for  the  accuracy  or  correcfnrs> 
witli  which  that  work  is  conducted. 

Mr.  SKIXNER.  It  is  his  duty  to  see  that  the  invoices  are  properly  prepared 
and  that  they  honestly  reflect  the  value  of  the  merchandise. 

Mr.  COCKKAX.  Your  compensation  is  the  same  so  long  as  yon  remain  in  the 
office,  under  this  bill? 

Mr.   SKIXXER.  Yes. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Do  you  think  it  would  be  possible  to  get  a  man  equal  to  such 
a  task  for  as  much  as  $9,000  a  year? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  know  that  I  have  many  colleagues  in  the  service  who  would 
be  abundantly  competent  to  carry  on  the  affairs  of  the  office. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  So  you  think  $9.000  would  secure  them? 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  15 

Mr.  SKINNER.  They  would  be  abundantly  fitted  by  their  qualifications  to"  do 
the  work,  but  I  doubt  whether  if  they  were  required  to  carry  on  the  office  for 
any  length  of  time  that  they  would  be  content  to  remain  in  the  position. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  The  market  value  of  the  service  is  above  $9,000? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Modesty  compels  me  to  decline  to  answer  that  question.  It 
is  a  practical  fact,  however,  going  back  to  the  question  of  the  representation 
allowances,  that  within  the  last  year  my  own  compensation  has  been  reduced 
by  20  per  cent  by  the  effect  of  exchange. 

Mr.  COCKKAN.  That,  of  course,  is  a  very  serious  matter. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  It  is  absolutely  indispensable,  if  we  are  going  to  equalize  con- 
ditions in  our  foreign  service,  that  there  should  be  some  method  of  relieving 
that  position.  It  is  a  very  serious  matter  to  a  man  with  a  family  and  wholly 
dependent  upon  his  official  income,  and  a  very  small  income  in  the  first  place, 
when  the  rate  of  exchange  is  $3.27  in  the  beginning  of  the  year  and  then  goes 
to  $4.65,  or  something  of  that  sort,  within  12  months.  You  must  do  something 
to  remedy  that  situation. 

Mr.  MOORE  of  Virginia.  Can  you  tell  us  now  regarding  the  question  that  I 
asked  the  Secretary,  how  this  bill  compares  with  the  plan  that  is  in  effect  in 
England,  selecting  and  compensating  officers  of  rank  similar  to  these  officers 
that  are  enumerated  in  the  bill? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  The  British  foreign  service  is  a  very  complicated  mechanism, 
indeed.  In  the  first  place,  they  have  not  one  consular  service  but  three  consular 
services.  They  have  what  is  called  the  Far  Eastern  service,  limited  to  officers 
who  have  served  in  China  and  Siam,  and  Japan,  and  who  are  educated  in  a 
special  way,  compensated  in  a  special  way,  and  who  are  promoted  and  live 
and  die  in  that  particular  branch  of  the  service.  Then  they  have  a  near  eastern 
consular  service  that  is  an  outgrowth  of  the  old  East  India  Company,  the  staff 
of  which  was  taken  over  by  the  British  Government  and  reorganized  as  a 
near  eastern  consular  service.  These  men  work  in  Turkey,  Egypt,  and  the 
near  east  generally.  They  are  educated  in  a  different  way  and  promoted  in 
their  own  lines.  Then  they  have  what  is  called  the  general  consular  service, 
which  is  a  totally  different  organization,  whose  members  serve  in  the  United 
States  and  in  South  America  and  in  various  parts  of  Europe.  That  service,  to  a 
very  large  extent,  is  composed  of  noncareer  men.  We  have  right  in  the 
United  States  a  number  of  them  at  American  ports,  noncareer  men;  men 
who  are  paid  considerable  sums  of  money  for  office  expenses  and  things  of 
that  sort.  On  top  of  that  they  have  what  is  called  the  commercial  secretarial 
staff.  They  are  men  who  do  some  things  which  our  consul  generals  now  do. 
while  at  the  same  time  they  are  commercial  attaches  with  diplomatic  rank. 
They  are  attached  to  embassies  and  legations  and  they  carry  on  commercial 
work  of  one  sort  and  another ;  and  then  they  have  also  the  diplomatic  service, 
properly  speaking,  composed  of  secretaries,  ambassadors,  and  ministers. 

Mr.  MOORE.  They  have  then  a  very  elaborate  and  stable  service. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Their  service  has  undergone  many  modifications  within  thtv 
past  few  years.  The  staff  of  commercial  secretaries  is  the  product  of  the  last 
five  years!  Undoubtedly  they  have  a  very  stable  service,  one  of  the  most  stable 
services  in  the  world.  They  have  increased  their  salaries  very  considerably  the 
last  five  years,  and.  of  course,  they  retire  upon  pensions  which  are  fixed  by  acts 
of  Parliament. 

Mr.  MOORE.  Give  a  general  idea  of  the  salary  basis,  going  into  it  in  detail. 

Mr.  SKINNKII.  My  recollection  is  that  the  consul  general  in  New  York  receives 
about  $26,000. 

Mr.  MOORE.  So  far  as  you  know,  Mr.  Skinner,  are  the  salary  schedules  in 
Wliitaker's  Almanac  correct? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes.  sir;  they  are  correct.  I  think  they  are  entirely  correct. 
Of  course,  the  British  consuls  receive  basic  salaries.  In  addition  to  that,  all 
the  important  ones  receive  allowances  to  cover  the  cost  of  rent  and  representa- 
tion. Even  the  vice  consuls,  etc..  rece've  allowances  for  quarters. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Do  they  not  have  the  right  to  retire  after  20  years  of  service? 

Mr.  SKINNKR.  Yes.  sir;  after  10  or  15  years'  service  they  have  the  right  to 
retire.  They  receive  retiring  allowances  based  on  the  number  of  years  of  active 
service. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Do  they  not  get  full  pay  after  20  years'  service? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  No;  three  fourths  pay. 


16  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF  THE   UNITED   STATES. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  should  like  to  inquire  either  of  you  or  Mr.  Carr  whether  there 
have  been  prepared  tables  showing  the  salary  scale  of  the  foreign  service  of 
Great  Britain  and  other  countries,  giving  both  the  diplomatic  and  consular  sides. 
I  should  like  to  have  that  in  the  record. 

Mr.  MOORE.  Will  you  give  us  the  general  method  of  select 'on  that  obtains  in 
England  of  those  officers? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  The  selection  of  officers,  in  the  first  place,  does  not  differ  very 
materially  from  our  own  method.  Men  are  designated  to  take  the  examination, 
and  thereupon  they  pass  the  prescribed  tests  and  are  admitted  to  the  service. 

The  CHAIRMAN-.  Before  you  leave  that  matter  of  retirement,  if  you  know, 
how  many  nations  provide  for  retirement  of  men  in  their  foreign  service? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  really  do  not  know  of  any  important  commercial  country 
that  has  not  a  retirement  system.  To  my  certain  knowledge  Belgium.  France. 
Germany.  Austria.  Italy.  Portugal — all  the  European  powers.  I  Think  ours  is 
the  only  country  that  has  not  a  retiring  feature. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Will  you  repeat  that,  please? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  do  not  know  of  any  country  in  the  world  other  than  our 
own.  except  possibly  some  South  American  Republics,  that  do  not  have  a  re- 
tirement provision.  In  some  cases  they  are  straight  pensions,  as  is  true  of 
Great  Britain.  There  is  no  contribution  in  Great  Britain. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  I  understand  there  is  no  contribution  there. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  No  contribution. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  I  always  understood  they  retire  on  full  pay.  You  say  it  is 
three-fourths  pay. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  think  that  is  not  the  case,  not  full  pay;  they  do  retire  on 
very  nearly  full  pay,  three-fourths. 

I  look  upon  that  clause  in  this  bill  which  gives  to  the  Secretary  of  State 
power  to  lodge  men  where  they  will  be  of  the  greatest  service  as  of  the  utmost 
importance.  Of  course,  we  have  the  foreign  service  as  it  now  exists,  composed 
of  men  who  were  selected  as  I  was  selected  and  others  were  selected,  a  good 
many  years  ago  in  a  more  or  less  haphazard  fashion,  but  in  more  recent  times, 
since  Mr.  Carr  has  been  so  successful  in  his  work,  we  have  had  an  increas- 
ingly scientific  method  of  selection,  and  appointment  to  the  service  is  handled 
in  a  somewhat  different  fashion. 

The  great  benefits  that  are  going  to  result  from  the  enactment  of  this  bill. 
if  it  is  enacted,  will  not  be  realized  at  once,  but  15  to  20  years  from  now.  when 
all  the  grades  of  the  service  are  filled  by  these  new  men  who  are  going  to  be 
recruited  in  a  different  fashion  and  enter  the  service  with  a  different  spirit, 
and  who  will  have  something  to  look  forward  to  at  the  very  top  of  their  career. 
Under  this  bill,  should  it  become  a  law,  the  young  man  who  passes  examinations 
and  will  be  sent  by  Mr.  Carr,  or  some  other  directing  force  in  the  department, 
let  us  say,  to  some  vice  consulate  in  some  remote  part  of  the  world,  where  he 
will  serve  for  a  time  and  learn  all  that  is  to  be  learned  in  that  office.  Can  he 
learn  in  a  better  school  than  in  a  consulate  where  he  meets  all  our  problems  as 
they  arise,  face  to  face  w'th  the  public?  Then  he  can  be  advanced  to  some' 
small  consulate,  then  sent  as  secretary  to  some  small  legation,  before  he  goes 
on  somewhere  else  as  secretary,  perhaps,  to  an  important  embassy,  or  then 
turned  hack  again  as  :i  consul  general,  in  the  Consular  Service.  Thus  our  men 
will  receive  a  great  variety  of  experiences,  so  that  ultimately  we  shall  get  a 
finished  product  with  which  to  till  the  highest  positions  in  the  embassies  and 
legations,  with  reasonable  assurance  that  you  will  have  the  right  kind  of 
material.  There  is  no  sort  of  system  in  the  world  or  any  power  on  earth  that  can 
devise  a  system  that  is  going  to  guarantee  that  after  20  yars'  service  an  1 
experience  a  man  is  going  to  give  the  very  best  possible  results.  All  that  you 
can  do  is  to  provide  a  means  by  which  you  can  take  material  when  it  :s  young 
and  plastic  and  submit  it  to  certain  educational  tests,  and  then  throw  it  into 
the  work  in  the  hope  that  it  will  turn  out  well.  We  are  finding  by  experience 
that  we  are  getting  that  kind  of  men.  and  you  would  be  delighted,  I  am  sure. 
could  you  step  into  the  London  office  and  see  the  young  men  we  have  there 
from  iivny  States  of  the  Union.  We  have  a  staff  of  55.  and  I  do  not  think 
there  is  more  than  one  from  any  one  State.  They  represent  every  type  of  our 
citizenship,  and  it  would  be  illum'nating  if  you  could  hear  their  conversations 
in  the  evening,  after  the  day's  work  is  done,  talking  over  the  various  problems 
arising  in  their  work.  We  have  language  classes  in  our  office  at  the  present 
time,  young  men  who  study  German,  other  young  men  who  study  French.  The 
heads  of  every  department  meet,  perhaps,  every  week  and  give  little  talks  to 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES.  17 

•.ill  the  young  men  on  the  practical  work  of  their  own  departments.  They  are 
.-ill  waiting  and  hoping  that  this  hill  will  pass. 

Mr.  MOORE.  Would  yon  say  that  to  stabilize  or  invigorate  our  foreign  service 
in  the  way  proposed  by  this  bill  would  result  in  widening  out  our  foreign 
commerce?  Do  you  think  that  the  proposition  in  this  hill  has  any  bearing  at 
all  upon  our  commercial  activities? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  do  not  think  there  is  the  slightest  doubt  about  it.  I  do  not 
think  that  your  foreign  representatives  can  sell  goods,  but  they  can  ascertain 
the  conditions  upon  which  goods  can  he  sold,  as  they  are  on  the  firing  line. 
They  see  conditions,  and  if  they  have  minds  that  are  in  the  habit  of  measuring 
up  these  conditions,  they  report  back  tbe  facts  in  this  country.  They  can  be 
of  the  greatest  utility.  That  is  what  we  are  doing  every  day.  What  we  are 
trying  to  do  in  our  daily  work  is  to  get  the  plain  citizen  out  in  St.  Louis  or 
somewhere  else,  who  manufactures  goods,  to  write  to  us  directly.  That  is  the 
sort  of  commercial  work  that  really  counts.  The  general  reports  which  we 
prepare  and  ought  to  prepare,  no  doubt,  are  of  very  considerable  utility.  They 
are  interesting.  People  read  them.  But  the  real  work  that  counts  and  helps 
foreign  trade  is  the  work  that  nobody  hears  very  much  about.  The  man  out  in 
Kansas  City  writes  to  London  or  Liverpool  or  somewhere  else  about  his  business 
and  wants  to  know  what  is  the  credit  of  so  and  so  and  why  things  are  not  as 
they  ought  to  be.  and  if  he  receives  an  intelligent  answer  to  his  specific  inquiry 
lie  is  greatly  assisted. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Can  you  answer  such  inquiries  as  that  if  a  man  in  Kansas 
Ci;y  or  St.  Louis  should  write  and  ask  about  the  credit  of  an  individual?  Would 
you  feel  free  to  answer  that  question? 

Mr.  SKINNKR.  We  are  not  permitted  under  our  regulations  to  give  of  our 
own  knowledge  information  as  to  the  credit  of  any  foreign  or  other  firm, 
but  we  are  permitted  to  quote  ratings  that  we  get  from  London  agencies, 
or  wherever  we  can  find  them,  and  we  try  to  get  that  information.  You 
might  say  the  man  in  Minneapolis,  or  St.  Louis,  or  Kansas  City  should  know 
that  sucii  agencies  as  Dun's  and  Bradstreet's  exist,  and  why  does  he  not 
go  to  them  or  to  his  hanker?  However,  he  wants  that  information  or  he 
would  not  write  for  it.  So  we  do  not  stop  to  give  him  a  lesson  on  how  to  carry 
on  his  business,  but  go  out  into  the  market  and  find  the  information  and  give 
it  to  him. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Is  there  any  machinery  in  the  State  Department  by  which 
that  kind  of  service  is  made  known  to  the  people  who  could  utilize  it? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  think  Mr.  Carr  is  conveying  those  impressions  to  the  com- 
mercial community  all  the  time. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  There  is  an  agency  in  the  State  Department  for  that  purpose? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  It  is  part  of  the  standing  regulations  of  the  State  Department 
to  do  that  kind  of  work. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  To  make  it  known  to  people  throughout  the  country,  to  make 
it  known  to  manufacturers  and  mechants  that  they  can  avail  themselves  of 
this  agency?  I  never  heard  of  it  before.  That  is  a  very  startl'.ng  and 
gratifying  piece  of  information. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Many  of  the  great  commercial  concerns  are  availing  them- 
selves of  this  information.  And  certainly  every  utility  of  the  State  Depart- 
ment, as  long  as  I  have  been  connected  with  it.  has  encouraged  direct  con- 
tact-; with  the  business  man  who  wants  information  which  the  consuls  in  the 
field  are  in  position  to  get. 

Mr.  COCKUAN.  How  does  it  encourage  that?  How  does  it  actually  encourage 
the  merchant  and  manufacturer  to  apply  directly  to  the  consul  abroad? 

Mr.  SKINNKR.  It  is  difficult  to  say.  It  is  in  the  nature  of  things  that  a  busi 
ness  man  who  des'res  some  special  help  at,  let  us  say  Frankfort,  should  write 
to  our  consul  at  Frankfort. 

Mr.  COOPER.  I  remember  your  reports,  and  I  have  had  manufacturers  in  my 
own  city  write  to  me  to  get  those  reports;  I  have  sent  them  home  to  them,  and 
me  of  them  told  me  that  it  helped  his  business.  He  was  engaged  in  making 
agricultural  implements. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  am  very  glad  to  hear  it.  That  is  the  value  of  the  general 
report.  The  general  report  is  issued  in  the  publicat'ons  of  the  Department  of 
Commerce,  and  they  get  from  there  into  the  technical  publications;  sometimes 
the  whole  report  is  not  published,  but  there  is  a  reference  to  it,  and  then  some- 
body in  New  Orleans  sees  it  and  discovers  that  the  mater'al  is  interesting  along 
a  certain  line,  and  writes  to  the  consul  and  says.  "  I  am  interested  in  this  par- 
ticular detaiLj|L.vour  territory.  What  can  you  get  for  me?" 


18  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

Mr.  MOORE.  That  is  shown  in  the  publications  issued  by  the  Department  of 
Commerce,  which  indicates  how  closely  in  contact  the  commercial  interests  of 
this  country  are  with  these  particular  officers  we  are  talking  about. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Undoubtedly. 

Mr.  COCKIIAN.  There  is  no  doubt  about  the  value  of  the  reports  and  about 
their  circulat.on.  You  just  now  made  the  remark  that  in  addition  to  furnish- 
ing all  these  reports  you  looked  up  the  credit  of  individuals. 

Mr.  SKINNEK.  We  do  that  when  that  information  is  asked. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  is  a  very  important  thing. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  We  are  not  trying  to  substitute  ours  for  the  regular  agencies 
of  trade,  but  we  certainly  do  feel  that  if  a  man  in  the  central  part  of  the 
country,  un  amiliar  with  foreign  trade,  wants  to  find  out  what  John  Smith  is 
worth  up  to  date,  we  should  let  him  know  or  tell  him  where  he  can  get  that 
information. 

Mr.  COCKKAN.  There  has  been  a  considerable  expansion  of  business  here  in 
Washington  and  elsewhere,  and  as  a  result  men  doing  business  make  applica- 
tions for  credit  here.  That  would  be  such  an  occasion  where  a  merchant  in 
this  country  would  call  upon  a  consul  for  information  in  a  fore  Urn  country. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  consul  would  give  it  to  him? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes. 

Mr.  BURTON.  You  were  about  to  state  how  that  information  was  obtained. 

Mr.   SKINNER.  Credit  information? 

Mr.  BURTON.  Ye*. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  In  my  own  practice  I  do  not  hesitate  to  go  t<>  a  reputable 
commercial  agency  and  buy  that  information  Ijke  anybody  else.  There  are  n«. 
appropriations  for  this.  If  I  find  I  am  led  into  an  expense,  generally  of  a 
trivial  amount.  I  advance  it  and  tell  the  man  out  in  St.  Louis  it  costs  so  much 
to  get  this  information,  and  I  have  not  known  one  to  fail  to  reimburse  the  oflire 
for  the  expenditure. 

As  I  said  in  the  very  beginning,  this  bill  opens  the  door  of  opportunity  to 
these  young  men:  and  you  can  only  get  the  right  young  men  by  giving  them 
the  thought  that  in  the  course  of  time,  and  if  they  are  successful,  they  may 
get  into  the  highest  ranks  of  the  service. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  To  sum  it  up,  it  gives  (lie  department  an  opportunity  to 
decide  the  value  of  a  man  on  the  theory  that  you  can  not  tell  what  a  man 
can  do  until  he  is  put  under  responsibility,  and  then  you  can  put  him  in  the 
place  for  which  he  is  best  fitted. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  This  bill  gives  an  opportunity  to  the  department  to  send  men 
to  those  particular  places  where  they  are  needed  and  which  they,  as  individuals, 
are  best  fitted  to  fill. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  simply  want  to  follow  the  policy  which  all  well-organ- 
ized business  firms  now  follow? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Precisely.  There  is  not  any  one  of  our  great  trade  organiza- 
tions, like  the  Standard  O.'l  Co.,  which  has  not  that  sort  of  method,  and  they 
have  in  effect  a  consular  service  of  their  own. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Mr.  Moore,  who  has  been  obliged  to  leave,  has  some  questions. 
and  I  have  two  or  three.  I  understand  the  chairman  thinks  it  Ms  wise  to  ad- 
journ now.  Mr.  Skinner,  can  you  be  here  to-morrow. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  shall  be  entirely  at  your  disposition. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  A  large  number  of  gentlemen  have  indica'ed  an  interest  in  this 
measure.  Among  them  are  Mr.  John  W.  Davis,  former  ambassador  to  (Jreat 
Britain;  Mr.  Frank  Polk,  former  Undersecretary  of  State:  and  Mr.  Henry 
White,  former  ambassador  to  France  and  member  of  the  Peace  Conference  at 
Versailles.  They  are  men  of  very  high  repute  and  standing  in  Mrs  country, 
and  have  indicated  a  desire  to  come  before  the  committee.  I  do  not  know 
what  is  the  pleasure  of  the  chairman  or  of  the  committee,  but  I  simply  want 
to  make  this  reference  at  this  time,  so  that  it  can  be  made  to  harmonize  with 
the  plans  of  fu'.ure  hearings. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  As  I  told  you,  you  are  the  introducer  of  rhe  bill,  and  the 
matter  of  the  testimony  is  entirely  in  your  control. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  If  agreeable  to  the  committee,  my  impression  is  that  we  had 
bet  er  hear  our  technical  experts  first,  Mr.  Skinner,  Mr.  Carr.  and  Mr.  Lay. 
and  then  we  can  bring  in  for  more  general  discussion  a  little  later  the  sort  of 
men  that  I  have  mentioned. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Personally,  I  would  like  very  much  to  hear  them. 

(Thereupon  the  committee  adjourned  to  meet  again  at  10  o'clock  a.  in., 
Wednesday,  December  13,  1922.) 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  19 

COMMITTEE  ox  FOREIGN  AFFAIRS. 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 
Washington,  Tuesday,  December  12,  1922. 

The  committee  this  day  met.  Hon.  Stephen  G.  Porter  (chairman)  pre- 
siding. 

STATEMENT   OF   MR.    WILBUR   J.    CARR,    DIRECTOR   OF   THE    CON- 
SULAR SERVICE,  STATE  DEPARTMENT. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  committee  will  please  come  to  order.     Mr.  Carr.  will 
you  give  your  full  name  and  official  position  to  the  stenographer,  and  proceed. 
Mr.  CARR.  Wilbur  J.  Carr,  Director  of  the  Consular  Service,  Department  of 
State. 

Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen,  I  think  I  should  say  at  the  beginning  of  my 
remarks  about  this  bill.  H.  R.  12543,  that  the  bill  contains  very  little  that 
is  new  in  principle.  You  have  done  in  Congress,  in  one  form  or  another,  prac- 
tically everything  that  is  in  the  bill.  You  have  in  the  past  adopted  the 
principle  of  classifying  the  diplomatic  service  below  the  grade  of  minister; 
you  have  adopted  the  principle  of  classifying  the  entire  consular  service, 
and  you  have  adopted  the  principle  of  post  allowances.  You  have  bonded 
consular  ollicers,  although  you  have  not  bonded  diplomatic  officers.  You  have 
established  a  retirement  system  for  the  classitied  civil-service  employees  of 
the  Government.  In  other  words,  you  have  from  time  to  time,  first  by  one 
act  and  then  by  another,  done  practically  everything  for  other  governmental 
-activities  which  this  bill  proposes  to  do  for  the  diplomatic  and  consular 
services.  The  novel  feature  of  this  bill  is  the  combination  which  it  contains 
of  those  things  which  have  been  adopted  by  Congress  in  the  past  in  one  form 
and  another  and  its  application  of  them  to  the  foreign  service. 

The  h'rst  point  to  which  I  would  like  to  direct  your  attention  is  that  part  of 
the  bill  which  adopts  a  new  and  un'form  salary  scale.  You  have  already 
classified  consuls  with  a  minimum  salary  of  §2,000  in  class  9  up  to  a  max  muni 
salary  of  $12,000  for  two  consuls  general  in  class  1.  You  have  also  classified 
the  diplomatic  secretaries,  beginning  with  the  minimum  salary  of  $2.500  and 
going  up  to  a  max  mum  salary  of  $4.<)00.  Now.  when  you  undertake  to  break 
down  the  wall  between  the  two  services  and  bring  about  Intel-changeability 
between  the  two  services,  there  must  be  provided  some  basis  upon  which  that 
interchangeability  can  take  place.  Suppose  you  desire  to  take  a  diplomatic 
•secretary  of  class  1.  a  counselor  of  embassy,  and  semi  h  m  as  a  consul  general 
somewhere  where  his  peculiar  qualifications  would  be  desirable.  You  would 
have  to  promote  him  from  $4,000,  his  diplomatic-service  salary,  to  $5,500, 
$6,000,  $8,000,  $12,000.  whatever  the  grade  of  consul  general  would  seem  to 
be  required.  That  would  be  inequitable  and  immediately  impair  the  morale 
in  both  branches  of  the  service.  On  the  other  hand,  if  you  should  wish  to  take 
a  consul  general  of  superior  commercial  expedience  and  make  him,  perhaps, 
counselor  of  an  embassy,  following  the  British  plan  of  having  commercial 
counselors  of  embassies  to  deal  with  quest  ons  of  interest  to  the  trade  of  the 
country,  you  would  have  to  reduce  him  to  $4.000.  That  would  not  work.  An 
embassy  should  be  able  to  avail  itself  of  the  commercial  expedience  of  a 
consul  general  without  the  necessity  of  reducing  his  salary  in  order  to  give 
him  a  position  in  the  embassy.  The  only  way  that,  apparently,  it  is  feasible 
to  provide  for  an  interchangeable  service,  to  unify  the  foreign  service,  promote 
the  highest  morale  in  both  services,  provide  for  the  orderly  transfer  of  men 
from  one  branch  to  the  other  is  to  provide  a  uniform  salary  scale  that  shall 
apply  to  both  the  diplomatic  and  consular  branches  of  the  service  equally. 

The  salary  scale  in  this  bill  has  been  devised  for  that  piirpose.  It  affords  a 
scale  of  compensation  that  is  certainly  not  excessive;  $3.000  to  $9,000  for  all 
officers  below  the  grade  of  minister  is  certainly  a  modest  compensation.  I  think 
I  can  re-enforce  that  statement  a  bit  by  calling  your  attention  to  what  is  done 
in  the  foreign  service  of  at  least  one  other  government.  The  British  Diplomatic 
and  Consular  Service  in  the  last  few  years  since  the  war  has  been  very  thor- 
ouglsly  reorganized,  as  Mr.  Skinner  yesterday  explained,  and  the  compensat:on 
very  generally  increased.  A  consul  general  in  -the  British  service  would  have 
from  $5.SUX)  to  $7.200  salary,  as  compared  with  our  $5.500  to  $8,000.  I  would 
raiher  leave  out  of  consideration  the  two  $12000  places  in  the  American  service, 
because  they  are  exceptions  to  the  general  ru!e,  and  it  is  hardly  fair  to  make 
these  two  exceptional  posts  the  basis  of  comparison.  But  in  addition  to  the 


20  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

British  .salaries  of  .$5,800  to  $7,200,  us  compared  with  our  .S.")..">00  to  $8,000,  there 
is  in  addition  a  representation  allowance  of  from  $1.400  to  $1.900  and  also  a  rent 
allowance  of  $1,200. 

Mr.  MOOKK.  What  do  you  mean  by  representation  allowances? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  mean  by  representation  allowances  those  allowances  which  ma.\ 
be  applied  to  the  excessive  cost  of  living,  to  entertainment,  to  various  personal 
outlays  that  are  involved  in  properly  representing  one's  government  in  a 
foreign  country  place.  For  instance,  the  British  Government  gives  its  consul 
general  in  New  York.  I  think.  S7.2OO  salary,  but  its  representation  allowance  is 
so  much  that  it  brings  the  total  amount  of  his  compensation  up  to  $24.000. 

Mr.  BROWNE.  l>o  they  have  to  give  an  account  of  that  fund? 

Mr.  CARR.  They  do,  I  think,  up  to  a  certain  point  have  to  give  an  account  of 
the  outlay  for  representation,  although  just  exactly  how  they  manage  That.  T 
am  not  sure.  The  representation  al!owance  is  apt  to  be  a  rather  complex  thing 
as  applied  to  the  foreign  service  of  Great  Britain.  They  have  a  method  of 
splitting  up  those  allowances  administratively  to  cover  different  things.  For 
instance,  in  the  British  service,  in  the  diplomatic  service  there  is  an  allowance 
for  china,  glass,  and  plate  given  to  any  minister  appointed.  There  is  an  allow- 
ance for  a  new  consul  or  a  new  secretary,  for  uniform,  of  $500,  approximately. 
There  are  allowances  for  motor  cars  for  each  head  of  a  mission,  and  so  on.  I 
might  go  on  here  with  a  long  list  of  things  that  they  provide  for.  which  we  do 
not.  We  provide  for  nothing  but  the  office  expenses  and  salary  and  pay  travel- 
ing expenses,  just  as  Great  Britain  pays  the  traveling  expenses  of  its  foreign 
service  officers.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say  that  the  State  Department  does 
not  seek  authority  to  supply  uniforms  and  motor  cars  to  ambassadors  and 
ministers. 

Going  back  again  to  the  compensation  of  our  consular  men,  at  Bucharest,  in 
Rumania,  the  compensation  happens  to  be  nearly  the  same.  We  pay  $.">.<  «>o ; 
Great  Britain  pays  $5.840.  AfGotenborg,  Sweden,  we  pay  $4.000;  the  British 
pay  $9,000.  At  Stockholm,  we  pay  $8.000;  they  pay  $6.400.  In  Poland,  we  pay 
$6.000;  they  pay  $6.400.  In  Latin  America,  at  Bahia,  in  Brazil,  we  pay  $4.000: 
they  pay  $8,300.  At  Para,  we  pay  $5.000;  they  pay  $9.000.  At  Rio  de  Janeiro, 
we  pay  $8.000;  they  pay  $12.000.  At  Buenos  Aires,  we  pay  $8.000;  they  pay 
$11.900. 

Mr.  BROWNE.  Do  they  exceed  ns  generally  in  South  America? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  BROWNE.  Are  those  cases  you  have  given  typical? 

Mr.  CARR.  Those  cases  are  typical,  and  that  is  not  true  of  South  America 
alone;  it  is  true  also  of  other  places.  I  am  j\ist  outlining  the  places  where  the 
difference  is  very  great. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  May  I  ask  whether  in  all  the  British  places  you  are  giving  the 
figure  represents  salary  plus  representation? 

Mr.  CARR.  Plus  representation  allowances? 

Mr.  ROGERS.  And  other  allowances  as  well? 

Mr.  CARR.  And  other  allowances  as  well,  exclusive  of  office  allowances.  We 
do  not  include  that  as  part  of  the  compensation. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  The  total  compensation  of  one  country  as  compared  with  the 
total  compensation  of  the  other. 

Mr.  CARR.  Quite  so.  In  Italy,  at  Genoa,  the  British  pay  $9.200;  we  pay 
$5.500.  At  Milan  they  pay  $9.200;  we  pay  $5.500.  At  Naples  they  pay  *<«.•_>< MI  : 
we  pay  $5,000.  At  Palermo  they  pay  $6.400 ;  we  pay  $4,000. 

Those  are  typical  salaries  plus  representation  allowances  plus  personal  and 
rental  allowances. 

Comparative  statement.  British  and  United  States  foreign  service. 


Great 
Britain. 

%8£   D»*~ 

Diplomatic  Service  

S3  983  414 

$2  994  597          $988,817 

6  591  431 

5  531  400         1  060  031 

Foreign  office 

1  669  442 

1  185  033            484  40& 

Total.... 

..    12.244.287 

9.711.030         2.533.2.57 

8,332,461  |    3,606,730  j      5,887,985 


Percentage  by  which  net  cost  of  British  service  exceeds  net  cost  of  United  States  service,  60. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF    THE    UNITED   STATES. 


21 


Comparative  statement  shotcing  salaries  of  ambassadors  and  ministers  at  im- 
portant posts. 


Great 
!  Britain. 

United 
States. 

Great 
Britain. 

United 

States. 

Albania 

i      $8,  515 

$10,  000 

Italy 

1  $38  932 

$17  500 

43  978 

17  500 

129  199 

i  17  500 

Austria  

.     '21.899 

10,000 

Mexico  

14,  599 

i  17,500 

Belgium  
Bolivia 

.     »26,765 
:      14  599 

17,500 
10  000 

Netherlands  

Norway 

124,332 
21  899 

12,000 
10  000 

Brazil 

45  014 

17  500 

15  572 

i  10  000 

Bulgaria  

17,  032 

10,000 

Persia  

24,332 

10,000 

Chile  

China 

.       23,359 
:    i  24  332 

117',  500 
i  12  000 

Peru  

18,102 
27  252 

17,500 
12  000 

14  399 

10  000 

19  466 

10  000 

Cuba     - 

19,012 

1  12,000 

Roumania  

19,466 

10,000 

:      19  466 

10  000 

Serbs,  Croats,  and  Slovenes    . 

18,979 

10,000 

21  «99 

10  000 

Siam 

14  599 

i  10  000 

i  58  398 

7  500 

Spain 

i  29  199 

17  500 

Esthonia,  Latvia,  and  Lithu- 

Sweeden  

21,899 

10,000 

i      18  006 

10  000 

Switzerland 

1  18,  248 

10,000 

Finland 

18  735 

10  000 

Turkey 

-  i  42  581 

i  17,500 

i    !  80,  297 

17,500 

United  States  

197  330 

Germany  
Great  Britain 

.     138,932 

17,500 
17,500 

Uruguay  
Venezuela 

20,439 
14,599 

10,000 
10,000 

Greece  

.       19,466 

10,000 

1  Residences,  owned  by  Government  and  supplied  in  addition  to  salary. 

CoiniKiratire  statement  shoiving  salaries  of  principal  consular  officers  at  im- 
portant posts. 


Great 
Britain. 

United 
States. 

Great 
Britain. 

United 
States. 

Argentina: 
Buenos  Aires  
Rosario  

$11,922 
7,907 
6  325 

$8,000 
3,.  500 
3  500 

Netherlands: 
Amsterdam  
Rotterdam  
Norway: 

$6,325 
9,246 

$5,000 
8,000 

9  246 

4  500 

Christiania 

6  569 

5  500 

Brazil: 
Bahia  

Para 

8,394 
9  124 

4,000 
5  000 

Bergen  

Paraguay,  Asuncion  
Peru,  Callao 

6,325 
6,813 
8  150 

4,500 
4,000 
14,500 

Rio  de  Janeiro  

12,  166 

8,000 

Poland,  Warsaw  

6,447 

6,000 

Chile,  Valparaiso  

Denmark,  Copenhagen 

11,679 
6  569 

5,500 
5  500 

Portugal: 
Lisbon 

6,325 

4,500 

6  812 

5  500 

8  515 

3  500 

France: 
Bordeaux  
Havre  . 

6,447 
6  569 

4,500 
5  500 

Roumania,  Bucharest  
Russia: 
Moscow 

6^7 
9  246 

5,000 
25,500 

Lille 

6  325 

4  000 

Petrograd 

7  664 

23  500 

Lyon  

6,569 

5,000 

Spain: 

Marseille  

Paris  . 

9,246 
9  246 

5,000 
12  000 

Barcelona  

Madrid 

9,246 

6  447 

5,500 
2,500 

Germany: 
Berlin  

9,002 

6,000 

Sweden: 
Goteborg  

9,246 

3,000 

Cologne  

9,002 
8  759 

4,500 
4  000 

Stockholm  

Switzerland: 

6,447 

8,000 

Munich  

6,325 

2,'  500 

Geneva  

6,326 

3,500 

Great  Britain,  London  
Greece,  Athens  
Italy: 
Genoa  

""<5,"325' 
9,246 

12,000 

5;ooo 

5,500 

Zurich  
Turkey: 
Constantinople  
Beyrout  

9,  246 

8,759 
8,759 

8,000 

8,000 
4,000 

Milan.... 

9  246 

5  000 

Smyrna  

8,759 

5,500 

Naples. 

9  246 

5  000 

United  States,  New  York    . 

26,035 

Palermo 

6  447 

4  000 

Mexico-  Mexico  City 

8  273 

i  5  000 

1  Consul  temporarily  in  charge. 

2  Office  now  closed. 


22  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

Comparative  xtatcmcnt.  liritixh  and  I'nitcrl  States  diplomatic  service. 


British. 

United 
States. 

British. 

United 
States. 

9 

13 

Second  and  third  secretaries 

Ministers  

34 

in  His  Majesty's  diplomatic 

Counsellors.  _  

15 

10 

service  or  foreign  office: 
Grade  I 

13 

Class  I 

27 

22 

Grade  II... 

22 

Class  II 

26 

31 

Grade  III 

5 

Class  III  
Class  IV 

25 
35 

Officers  holding  local  rank  in 
the     diplomatic     service, 

minister  

1 

1 

Total  

176 

171 

xtatement,  Britixh   (Hid   United  States  Consular  Service. 


- 

British. 

United 
States. 

39 

48 

2 

7 

Consuls  

154 

328 

Vice  consuls  

568 
41 

116 
88 

Probationer  consuls  (consular  assistants)  

ft 

Proconsuls  

152 

Total 

1  018 

597 

British  foreign  service. 


Salary. 

Representation 
allowance. 

House  rent 
allowance. 

Ambassador  
Envoy  extraordinary  and  minister  plenipoten- 
tiary 

$12,  166 

9.733 
(243)S5,  839-7,  299 
(121)3,893-2,433 

|  (97)  1,459-2,  919 
8,273 

(243)5,839-7,299 
(121)3,893-1,866 
(121)2,919-3,893 
1  243)5,839-7,  299 
(243)5,839-7,299 
(12m!  893  LS66 
(97)1,459-2,919 

(') 

$1,459-85,353 
1,  216-  3,  406 
729-  2,676 
1,459 

1,459 
486-  1,216 
486 
1,946 
1.459-  1,946 
1,216 
485-      729 

(!) 

81,459-13,406 
9,733-  3,406 

729-  1,946 
1,216 

1,  210 
1,  216 
486-    973 
1,216 
1,216 
973 
4S6-    973 

Counselor  

First  secretary  

Third  secretary  

Commercial  counsellor  
Commercial  secretaries: 
Grade  I  

Grade  II  

Grade  III 

Inspectors  general  

Consuls  general  
Consuls,  -.   . 

1  Varies  according  to  the  requirements  of  the  post. 

.Mr.  TKMi'i.K.  Are  those  figures  based  on  par  of  the  British  money,  or  tire  they 
based  on  the  actual  payments  in  money  of  the  country  to  which  the  representa- 
tives are  sent? 

Mr.  CARK.  They  are  based  on  par  of  British  exchange,  because  it  would  be 
hardly  feasible  to  calculate  them  in  any  other  way,  in  view  of  the  fluctuations 
in  foreign  currencies. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  May  I  ask  why  this  extra  allowance  is  called  representation 
allowance? 

Mr.  CARB.  Because  it  is  the  cost  of  representation. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  Representing  the  Government? 

Mr.  (.'ABB.  Representing  the  Government ;  exactly.  In  the  consular  service 
it  is  comparatively  modest.  In  their  diplomatic  service  it  is  relatively  large. 
For  instance,  take  the  British  Embassy  in  Washington.  The  total  amount 
which  the  British  ambassador  receives  by  way  of  compensation  and  representa- 
tion allowance  is.  I  think,  close  to  $100,000 ;  it  is  over  $90,000. 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED  STATES.  23 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  That  would  cover  expenses  which  he  would  not  incur  as  a 
private  person  but  which  he  must  incur  as  an  official  person. 

Mr.  CARE.  Quite  so.  He  must  do  various  things.  He  must  do  a  liberal 
amount  of  entertaining,  otherwise  his  usefulness  as  an  ambassador  is  restricted. 
He  must  come  in  contact  with  our  people ;  he  must  travel  about  the  country  in 
order  to  gain  a  correct  understanding  of  our  people  and  of  opinion  and  condi- 
tions. He  should  not  have  to  pay  that  expense  personally.  The  travel  is  for 
the  benefit  of  the  people  and  the  Government  he  serves,  and  can  be  made  an 
important  factor  in  promoting  good  relations  between  our  people  and  his  own 
people. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  May  I  ask  again,  to  get  the  comparison  straight  for  the  record, 
Is  it  a  fair  comparison  to -make  between  the  $90.000  to  $100,000  that  the  British 
ambassador  at  Washington  gets  and  the  $17,500  that  the  American  ambassador 
at  Paris  gets? 

Mr.  CARE.  In  a  general  way  it  is.  Washington  may  be  a  slightly  more  ex- 
pensive place  to  live  in. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Is  it  the  total  compensation  in  each  case? 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  Please  make  it  clear  in  comparing  the  British  ambassador  In 
Paris  with  the  American  ambassador  in  Paris,  where  living  conditions  are  just 
the  same. 

Mr.  CARR.  Answering  Mr.  Rogers's  question  first,  the  salary  of  the  American 
ambassador  in  London  is  $17,500.  The  salary  of  the  British  ambassador  In 
Washington,  I  think,  is  something  like  $12,000  to  $15,000,  or  thereabouts.  The 
British  ambassador  in  Washington  has  a  home  completely  furnished  for  occu- 
pancy as  ambassador.  The  Am^jican  ambassador  in  London  at  the  present  mo- 
ment has  no  home  furnished,  but  will  have  very  shortly,  when  the  repairs  are  done 
on  the  house  which  Mr.  Morgan  gave  to  the  Government  for  the  residence  of 
the  ambassador.  The  American  ambassador  in  London  pays  his  own  house 
rent,  and  if  he  gives  a  dinner,  if  he  gives  a  Fourth  of  July  reception,  if  he 
does  anything  else  that  costs  money  in  representing  his  Government,  he  must 
pay  for  it  out  of  his  own  pocket  or  out  of  his  $17,500  salary.  The  British  am- 
bassador in  Washington,  on  the  other  hand,  has  his  $12,500  salary,  and  in 
addition  to  that  he  has  the  difference  between  that  and  approximately  $97,350 
provided  by  his  Government  as  a  lump  sum  for  the  expenses  in  representing 
his  Government  and  doing  the  things  necessary  to  make  him  an  efficient  repre- 
sentative. 

The  American  ambassador  in  Paris  gets  $17,500.  He  has  no  house  furnished 
by  the  Government.  He  has  no  other  allowance  for  representation  expenses 
of-  any  character  whatsoever.  He  is  given  merely  the  allowance  usually  made 
for  the  office  expenses. 

Mr.  COLE.  How  about  traveling  expenses — anything  at  all? 

Mr.  CARR.  Nothing  whatsoever. 

Mr.  COLE.  $17,500  is  all  that  he  gets? 

Mr.  CABR.  All  that  he  gets.  The  British  ambassador  in  Paris  has  a  mag- 
nificent residence,  purchased  by  the  British  Government  many  years  ago,  which, 
before  the  World  War  was  supposedly  worth  $1,500.000.  He  gets  in  addition 
to  that  $80,000  salary  and  representation  allowances. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  Do  you  happen  to  know  how  much  the  American  ambassador 
in  Paris  pays  out  of  his  own  pocket  for  rental? 

Mr.  CABR.  I  do  not  happen  to  know  that. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  It  has  been  at  times  us  high  as  $20,000,  out  of  a  salary 
of  $17,500. 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes.  That,  of  course,  depends  on  the  ambassador,  his  private 
means,  his  tastes,  etc.  That  brings  us  to  another  point  which  I  might  mention, 
and  that  is,  the  evil  of  that  sort  of  thing.  By  not  paying  sufficient  salary,  by 
not  having  Government-owned  residences,  by  not  allowing  an  amount  for  ex- 
penses of  representation  we  have  had  the  spectacle  of  diplomatic  appointments 
being  given  to  men  of  great  wealth  who  have  lived  magnificently  and  made 
lavish  expenditures  for  entertainment,  being  followed  by  very  eminent  men 
with  modest  means,  who  were  commented  upon  most  unfavorably  because  they 
were  not  able  to  live  in  a  manner  comparable  with  that  in  which  their  prede- 
cessor had  been  living.  That  is  not  democratic ;  that  is  not  right.  There  ought 
to  be  such  a  scale  of  living  established  as  would  enable  an  ambassador  to 
represent  this  country  properly  but  not  overdo  it  and  be  unduly  lavish  •  in 
expenditure. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  think  it  may  not  be  altogether  clear  in  our  minds  what  the 
technical  distinction  is  between  representation  allowance,  which  is  a  new 

24470—22 3 


24  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

phrase  in  our  legislation,  as  far.  as  I  know,  and  post  allowance,  which  is  a 
fairly  familiar  phrase  to  this  committee,  and  is  also  embodied  in  legislation. 

Mr.  CARB.  I  would  explain  that  somewhat  in  this  manner.  A  representation 
allowance  is  an  allowance  which  has  its  origin  in  the  practice  of  foreign  gov- 
ernments. It  may  cover  furniture  and  furnishings  for  the  official  residence, 
and  the  rent  of  the  officer's  residence.  It  may  cover  entertainment.  .It  may 
cover  an  allowance  for  receptions  on  the  annual  Fourth  of  July  celebration. 
It  may  cover  an  allowance  for  expenses  of  official  entertainment  given  to  the 
officers  and  commanders  of  our  fleets  when  they  visit  foreign  ports.  It  may 
cover  various  outlays  which  the  head  of  a  mission  or  a  consulate  makes  in 
properly  representing  his  government.  Moreover,  it  is  to  be  accounted  for  in 
precisely  the  manner  in  which  expenditures  are  usually  accounted  for,  so  that 
it  is  known  what  has  been  done  with  the  money  and  usually  the  exact  benefit 
derived  from  the  outlay.  The  post  allowance,  on  the  other  hand,  was  used  by 
the  British,  by  the  French,  by  others,  and  by  us  during  the  war,  and  immedi- 
ately after  the  war  to  cover  that  increase  in  expenditure  arising  out  of  the 
fluctuations  in  exchange,  the  sudden  rise  in  cost  of  living,  and  that  sort  of 
thing.  It  was  a  sort  of  war  bonus  such  as  we  had  here  for  the  classified  civil- 
service  employees  and  was  given  as  additional  compensation  and  hence  was  a 
personal  bonus  for  the  officer. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Do  representation  allowances  take  into  consideration  the  cost 
of  living  at  a  particular  capital,  depreciation  in  exchange,  and  such  matters? 
Mr.  CARE.  It  depends  altogether  on  the  attitude  of  Congress  toward  that. 
It  is  perfectly  possible  to  cover  the  two  purposes  in  one  authorization,  or  one 
appropriation,  or  keeping  the  two  purposes  sfparate,  whichever  happens  to  be 
the  will  of  Congress  to  do. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Representation  allowance  is  a  term  that  is  broad  enough  if  we 
desire  to  include  all  that  post  allowance  includes  and  more  things  besides? 

Mr.  GARB.  It  might  include  more  things  besides.  I  personally  think  that  it  is 
of  the  utmost  importance  in  proper  conduct  of  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular 
Service  that  there  should  be  such  an  allowance. 

Mr.  MOORE.  There,  does  not  seem  to  be  any  representation  allowance  provided 
for  by  this  bill. 

Mr.  CABR.  There  is  an  authorization  on  page  7,  section  13,  line  12.  There 
is  no  appropriation  requested  at  this  time,  but  there  is  in  that  section  an 
authorization  for  appropriations  for  representation  allowances  in  case  Con- 
gress at  some  future  time  should  desire  to  make  appropriations  for  that  pur- 
pose. 

We  have  now  post  allowances  of  some  $200,000.  It  was  thought  that  if 
for  the  time  being  the  new  scale  of  salaries  should  be  adopted  in  the  form 
contained  in  this  bill  Congress  might  well  drop  the  post  allowance  for  the 
time  being,  at  least,  to  see  if  we  can  go  on  without  it,  and  at  some  future 
time  when  conditions  require  it  and  when  Congress  is  in  a  position  to  be  more 
generous  to  the  foreign  service,  feels  it  can  afford  to  spend  the  money,  it  may 
be  well  to  make  some  better  provision  for  both  diplomatic  and  consular  of- 
ficers, or,  certainly  for  ambassadors  and  ministers,  by  appropriating  under 
this  authorization  a  representation  allowance  to  help  them  bear  the  cost  of 
properly  representing  the  Government.  Furthermore,  it  is  thought  also  that 
Congress  might,  rather  than  appropriate  large  salaries  or  salaries  that  would 
seem,  perhaps,  to  us  and  to  Congress  unduly  large,  be  willing  to  find  in  the 
representation  allowance  the  medium  of  providing  adequate  expenses  to  defray 
the  cost  of  our  foreign  representation.  That  is  the  general  thought  back  of 
proposing  representation  allowances.  Now,  the  question  whether  you  should 
combine  post  allowances  with  representation  allowances  and  consider  repre- 
sentation allowance  to  cover  both  post  and  representation  allowances,  as  I  have 
sought  to  define  them,  or  whether  you  should  provide  an  authorization  for 
post  allowances  separately  from  representation  allowances,  I  submit  to  the  com- 
mittee for  its  own  determination.  One  or  both  should  be  included  in  any  measure 
for  the  permanent  improvement  of  the  foreign  service. 
Mr.  MOORE.  Is  post  allowance  carried  in  the  existing  bill? 
Mr.  CARR.  The  appropriation  is  carried  in  the  existing  appropriation  bill, 
but  there  is  no  statutory  authorization*  for  it.  I  would  submit  that  there  is  a 
need  for  statutory  authorization  for  representation  allowances  and  post  allow- 
ances. In  1918,  I  think  it  was,  there  was  a  very  sudden  advance  in  exchange  in 
the  Far  East,  which  automatically  cut  in  half  the  purchasing  power  of  the  sala- 
ries which  we  pay  our  men  out  there.  We  had  the  entire  Consular  Service  and 
some  of  the  legation  staff  on  the  point  of  resigning  from  the  service,  because  the 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  25 

purchasing  power  of  their  salaries  had  become  too  low  to  cover  their  living 
expenses.  The  Standard  Oil,  the  British-American  Tobacco  Co.,  and  other  big 
companies  in  China  immediately  supplemented  the  salaries  of  their  employees 
by  additional  allowances.  We  were  unable  to  relieve  our  consuls  and  secretaries 
without  an  appropriation  by  Congress.  There  was  a  great  deal  of  suffering  and 
we  underwent  a  great  deal  of  anxiety  through  that  period  of  almost  a  year 
before  Congress  was  convinced  that  an  additional  allowance  ought  to  be  ap- 
propriated. Under  the  present  adjustment  for  the  handling  of  legislation  in 
Congress,  unless  there  is  statutory  authorization,  you  might  have  difficulty  in 
acting  quickly  in  a  case  of  that  kind  in  the  future. 

Mr.  RQ%GERS.  This  particular  item  was  before  the  House  yesterday  afternoon, 
and  although  subject  to  a  point  of  order,  the  point  of  order  was  not  made,  and 
$150,000  was  authorized.  I  am  glad  to  know  that  Director  Carr,  who,  I  assume, 
is  the  present  witness,  was  quoted  as  the  basis  for  the  propriety  of  that  action, 

The  CHAIRMAN.  These  post  allowances  are  under  your  supervision  so  far  as 
the  Consular  Service  is  concerned? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Who  has  charge  of  these  so  far  as  the  legations  and  em- 
bassies are  concerned? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  Third  Assistant  Secretary. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Discretionary  power  in  the  case  of  the  Consular  Service  is 
vested  in  you? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  And  in  the  case  of  embassies,  in  the  Third  Assistant  Sec- 
retary? 

Mr.  CARE.  Yes. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  It  is  your  duty  and  the  duty  of  the  Third  Assistant  Secre- 
tary to  meet  these  conditions  and  adjust  the  amount  in  an  equitable  way? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes.  We  seek  as  a  basis  for  the  expenditure  of  the  appropriation 
to  get  reports  annually  from  the  officers  abroad,  following  a  certain  definite 
form,  bring  out  their  informaton  on  the  cost  of  living,  the  actual  facts  as  to 
prices  of  articles  entering  into  the  cost  of  living  of  the  average  individual.  Then 
we  check  them  by  price  index  numbers,  such  as  those  published  by  the  Federal 
Reserve  Board,  or  practically  the  entire  world.  We  take  into  consideration  the 
effect,  upon  results  thus  obtained,  of  depreciated  currency  of  the  foreign  country, 
the  amount  of  allowance  that  ought  to  be  made  for  gain,  by  exchange,  and 
accordingly  the  actual  net  purchasing  value  of  the  salaries.  Then  we  try  to 
allow  an  amount,  which  in  the  light  of  needs  elsewhere  and  the  amount  of  the 
available  appropriation,  would  seem  to  be  equitable  and  be  just  to  the  men. 

Mr.  MOORES.  What  maximum  have  you  already  reached  in  making  those  al- 
lowances? 

Mr.  CARR.  At  one  time  when  we  had  some  $600,000  or  $700,000  there  were 
cases  where  the  salaries  were  cut  to  such  an  extent  that  we  allowed  almost 
the  full  amount  of  the  salary  in  addition,  but  the  post  allowances  never  went 
to  the  high-salaried  men.  They  practically  always  went  to  the  medium  and 
low  salaried  men. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  That  large  appropriation  of  $600,000  was  during  the  war? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes;  toward  the  end  of  the  war,  when  there  was  the  greatest 
rise  in  the  cost  of  living  and  the  most  marked  fluctuation  in  exchange.  Mr. 
Lay  has  just  called  my  attention  to  the  fact  that  we  had  telegraphic  resigna- 
tions of  consuls  in  Chile  at  that  time  when  we  were  trying  to  get  from  Con- 
gress an  appropriation  to  relieve  the  condition  which  arose  out  of  the  fluctua- 
tion in  exchange. 

Mr.  MOORES.  You  can  not  tell  the  propriety  or  necessity  of  post  allowances 
everywhere.  But  is  there  not  an  especial  need  for  them  in  positions  where 
we  have  no  diplomatic  representation,  such  as  South  Africa.  India.  Australia, 
and  Ireland,  where  certain  social  duties  are  forced  on  consular  officers? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  am  glad  you  asked  that  question.  That  is  true.  Let  us  take, 
for  example,  a  post  like  Ottawa. 

Mr.  MOORES.  And  Canada,  of  course. 

Mr.  CARR.  Ottawa.  Calcutta,  Melbourne.  Capetown.  Singapore,  Batavia.  Java, 
and  places  of  that  kind.  You  might  conceivably  double  the  value  of  your  repre- 
sentation if  you  could  supplement  the  compensation  of  your  representative  in 
such  a  way  as  to  enable  him  to  advance  his  scale  of  living,  to  do  more  enter- 
taining, to  come  into  more  intimate  contact  with  public  men  and  the  principal 
commercial  people  of  that  particular  section.  If  you  were  engaged  in  a  large 
business  in  this  country  and  you  were  to  send  a  representative  or  agent  to 


26  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF  THE   UNITED  STATES. 

reside  and  do  business  in  any  one  of  the  places  mentioned,  you  would  certainly 
do  several  things.  In  the  first  place,  you  would  require  him  to  take  quarters  in 
a  very  dignified  place  that  was  worthy  of  your  business. 

You  would  give  him  adequate  compensation,  but  you  would  also  give  him  a 
certain  amount,  a  certain  allowance,  a  certain  amount  of  money  which  he  was 
to  expend  in  representing  you.  Well,  representing  you  how?  By  getting  in 
touch  with  the  people  to  whom  he  was  going  to  sell  goods,  having  them  to 
lunch  occasionally,  perhaps  to  dinner  occasionally,  going  to  their  houses  on 
occasions,  belonging  to  the  clubs  that  would  bring  him  into  contact  with  those 
people.  This  is  the  course  which  every  well-established  business  house  doing 
business  on  a  large  scale  takes  as  a  matter  of  every  day  practice.  The  Gov- 
ernment would  gain  in  a  similar  way  from  adopting  exactly  the  same  method 
under  proper  administrative  control,  avoiding  lavishness  or  waste  of  public 
money. 

That,  I  think,  practically  finishes  what  I  have  to  say  on  the  subject  of  the 
'  need  of  better  compensation  for  our  diplomatic  and  consular  officers. 

Mr.  MOORE.  Will  you  let  ine  ask  a  question  that  may  be  put  in  the  House? 
With  the  present  basis  of  compensation,  have  you  been,  having  any  difficulty 
in  securing  suitable  people  for  this  service? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  think  I  can  best  answer  that  question  in  this  way :  At  our  last 
examination  there  were  some  100  candidates.  We  passed,  I  think,  12,  for  the 
Consular  Service.  Some  of  the  best  men  that  we  have  had,  a  number  of  them, 
have  left  the  service  to  take  up  better  positions  in  private  concerns.  For 
instance,  a  year  and  a  half  ago  a  man  who  was  a  credit  to  the  service,  one  of 
the  highest  grade  consuls  general  we  had,  receiving  a  salary  of  $8,000,  went 
TO  New  York  at  $25,000.  A  short  time  ago  a  man  in  charge  of  the  commercial 
department  of  my  own  office  in  the  department,  a  consul  of  the  $5,000  class, 
took  a  business  position  paying  $20,000  to  $25,000  a  year.  He  was  actually 
driven  out  of  the  service  because  family  reasons,  compelled  him  to  make  more 
money.  He  went  out  of  the  service  into  a  place  paying  between  $20.000  and 
§25,000.  I  could  go  on  and  give  you  name  after  name  of  men  who  have  done 
that  sort  of  thing.  Mr.  Lay  calls  my  attention  to  one  of  our  inspectors  who 
has  only  recently  refused  $28,000.  I  did  not  know  that  the  commercial  enter- 
prises who  wish  his  services  had  raised  their  offer  to  $28,000;  they  have  been 
trying  to  persuade  him  for  four  years  to  go  with  them.  They  began  at  $15,000 
and  have  been  going  up  ever  since. 

Mr.  MOORE.  Does  that  condition  mean  less  stability  in  our  service  than  in  the 
British  service? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes.  The  opportunities,  I  think,  for  our  men  to  go  out  into  higher- 
paid  positions  is  greater  here  than,  perhaps,  it  is  over  there.  Our  attitude  in 
this  country  toward  governmental  positions,  of  course,  is  different  from  the 
attitude  in  either  Great  Britain  or  France.  There  the  honor  of  representing 
the  Government  counts  for  much  more  than  it  does  over  here,  and  men  are 
Avilling  to  keep  on  at  salaries  which  the  Government  pays  them.  It  is  that 
very  thing  which  we  should  seek  to  develop  in  this  country  in  all  branches  of 
the  Government  service,  particularly  in  our  foi-eign  service.  Man  for  man  the 
British  or  French  secretary  or  consul  will  be  willing  to  serve  for  less  compen- 
sation than  an  American,  and  yet  I  have  shown  you  that  the  British  salaries  are 
much  greater  than  ours.  I  believe  I  am  safe  in  saying  that  there  are  a  large 
number  of  men  among  the  best  of  our  men  in  the  service  who  are  staying  on. 
holding  on  in  the  hope  that  some  such  measure  as  this  will  be  enacted  that 
will  bring  some  relief  to  them,  giving  them  something  more  to  look  forward  to. 
making  them  feel  that  the  increased  compensation  and  prospects  will  enable 
them  to  stay  on  in  the  service.  'They  want  to  do  this  particular  work,  to  serve 
the  country'  in  the  foreign  service.  They  will  do  that  as  long  as  they  can  do 
it  without  too  great  a  sacrifice.  I  could  give  you  at  once,  I  think,  safely,  the 
names  of  25  men  in  the  Consular  Service  alone  who  could  step  out  at  anywhere 
from  twice  to  three  or  four  times  the  amount  the  Government  pays  them.  There 
are  many  in  the  Diplomatic  Service  who  could  do  likewise.  It  is  that  kind  of 
men  we  ought  to  keep  in  the  service.  The  Government  needs  them  now  as 
never  before. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  is  your  salary? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  get  the  very  exorbitant  salary  of  $4.500. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  What  is  the  total  salary  increase  attributable  to  the  Consular 
Service  that  Secretary  Hughes  mentioned  yesterday  as  likely  to  result  from 
the  enactment  of  this  bill? 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 


27 


Mr.  CARE.  The  total  amount  was  .$378,000  for  both  services,  and  the  retii-e- 
nient. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  The  total  increase? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  total  increase. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  The  total  yearly  increase  resulting  from  this  proposed  bill? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  total  yearly  increase  is  only  $328,000.  The  amount  for  the 
first  year  would  be  $378.000,  because  there  is  included  $50,000  to  start  the  re- 
tirement system.  The  increase  for  the  Consular  Service  would  be,  minus  the 
retirement  fund,  $261,000.  Take  off  half  the  post  allowances  and  you  would 
have  $161,000,  really. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  That  is  divided  among  some  400  men? 

Mr.  CARR.  That  is  divided  among  520  men. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  The  average  increase  would  be  extremely  small  in  the  Con- 
sular Service? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes.  Mr.  Lay  says  14  per  cent,  in  the  aggregate.  But  you  are 
leaving  out  of  consideration,  of  course,  the  effect  upon  these  men  of  the  adop- 
tion of  the  retirement  system.  That  is  the  thing  that  gives  the  men  a  sense 
of  security.  These  men  are  not  interested  in  making  money,  or  they  would 
not  be  in  this  service.  They  are  interested  in  serving  the  Government  and 
doing  a  class  of  work  which  they  would  rather  do  than  anything  else,  provid- 
ing tliey  can  do  it  without  too  much  sacrifice  to  their  families.  Most  of  them 
will  continue  at  less  than  outside  employment  would  offer  if  they  can  have 
assurance  that  at  some  time  in  the  future  they  will  not  be  thrown  out  on  the 
world  because  they  are  too  old  and  too  inethVient  to  justify  being  carried  on  the 
active  salary  roll.  If  we  can  enable  them  to  look  forward  to  eventual  retire- 
ment upon  reasonable  condensation  we  will  rind  that  it  will  go  a  long  way 
toward  doing  away  with  the  necessity  of  having  any  marked  increase  of 
salaries. 

Mr.  TEMIM.E.  I  talked  this  summer  with  some  of  the  men  in  Berlin,  Prague, 
Vienna,  and  Paris,  and  know  that  all  of  them  are  more  interested  in  the 
retirement  feature  of  this  bill  than  any  other  part  of  it. 

Mr.  CARR.  Exactly. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  That  is,  I  mean  from  the  personal  point  of  view.  They  are  all 
convinced,  also,  that  it  will  very  much  increase  the  efficiency  of  the  service. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  do  not  know  of  any  more  effective  way  to  do  that  than  through 
the  retirement  provision. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  My  experience  is  identical  with  that  of  Doctor  Temple. 

Mr.  CARR.  That  is  the  general  sentiment  in  the  service. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  In  order  to  give  us  figures  as  to  the  added  expense  which  will 
result  from  the  enactment  of  a  bill  like  this  you  must,  I  assume,  have  placed 
the  consular  force  and  the  diplomatic  force  into  classes  in  a  more  or  less 
arbitrary  way. 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  In  other  words,  in  a  way  which  might  not  be  followed  in  prac- 
tice if  the  law  should  be  enacted.  I  think  it  might  be  useful,  if  you  can  do 
this,  to  put  in  the  record  the  tabulation  which  shows  how  you  work  this  thins: 
out. 

Schedule  of  proposed  recJassification. 


Present 
salaries. 

Proposed 
salaries. 

Increase. 

Diplomatic  Service                                                                     .... 

$379.  000 

$646,000 

$267  eoo 

1,935  000 

2  196  500 

261  500 

Total  

2,314,000 

2,  842,  500 

o2S,  500 

50  000 

578  500 

Post  allowance  abolished  

200,000 

Net  cost  .... 

378  500 

28  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED  STATES. 

Diplomatic  and  Consular  Service. 


Number. 

Salary. 

Total. 

PROPOSED  DIPLOMATIC  SERVICE. 

Class  l 

12 

$9  000 

$108  000 

10 

8000 

80  000 

Class  3                                    .  .            

23 

7,000 

161,000 

Class  4                                                                          

17 

6,000 

102,000 

Class  6 

20 

4  500 

90  000 

Class  8 

30 

3  500 

105  000 

646,000 

PRESENT  DIPLOMATIC  SERVICE. 

Class  1 

22 

4  000 

88  000 

Class  2 

28 

3,625 

101  \  500 

Class  3                                                                           

29 

3,000 

87,000 

Class  4 

41 

2  500 

102  500 

379,000 

Increase  

267,000 

PRESENT  CONSULAR  SERVICE. 

Consuls  general  : 

2 

12  000 

°4  000 

Class  2.   . 

14 

8,000 

112,000 

Class  3 

9 

6,000 

54  000 

Class  4 

20 

5  500 

110  000 

Class  5  

1 

4,500 

4,500 

Consuls  general  at  large  

Consuls: 
Classl  

1 

5,000 

8,000 

304,500 
35,000 

8,000 

Class  2. 

1 

6  000 

6  000 

Class  3 

39 

5  000 

195  000 

Class4  

41 

4,500 

184,500 

ClassS  
Class  6 

56 

88 

4,000 
3  500 

224,000 
308  000 

Class? 

88 

3  000 

264  000 

ClassS  

9 

2,500 

22,500 

Class  9 

1 

2  000 

2  000 

Vice  consuls  de  carriere: 
Classl 

28 

3  000 

1,214,000 

84  000 

Class  2  

30 

2,750 

82'  500 

.  Class  3. 

60 

2500 

150  000 

Reserve  

316,500 

1,870,000 
65,000 

Total  . 

\  935  000 

PROPOSED  CONSULAR  SERVICE. 

Class  1  ... 

1 

12  000 

12  000 

Do..       .  .             ... 

14 

9  000 

126  000 

Class  2 

16 

8  000 

120  000 

Class  3 

23 

7  000 

161*  000 

Class  4  
Do  
Class  5 

1 
41 
51 

S,000 
6,000 
5  000 

8,000 
246,000 
255  000 

Class  6 

4  500 

270'000 

Class  8 

90 
80 

4,000 
3  500 

360,000 
280  000 

Class  9 

12 

3  000 

36  000 

Unclassified  

120 

3,000 
2  750 

1        322  500 

2,500 

Total 

2  196  500 

FOREIGN   SERVICE    OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 


29 


Tentative  rcclassification  under  H.  R.  125Jt3   (diplomatic  and  consular 
combined). 


Number. 

Salary. 

Total. 

Foreign  service  officers: 
Class  1 

/              26 

$9,000 

$234,000 

Class  2.... 

25 

8.000 

200,000 

Class  3  
Class! 

46 
f               58 

7,000 
6,000 

322,000 
348,000 

Class  5  

51 

5,000 

255,000 

Class  6  

Class  7 

80 
90 

4,500 
4  000 

360,000 
360,000 

Class  8 

110 

3  500 

385  000 

Class  9  

12 

3,000 

36,000 

120 

f          3,000 
\          2  750 

I        322,500 

1          2500 

1 

Grand  total  

2,842,500 

1  Salary  of  present  incumbent. 

Mr.  CARK.  I  am  very  glad  to  do  that.  We  have,  of  course,  assumed  that  if 
this  bill  were  put  into  operation  the  adjustment  would  throw  a  certain  number 
of  men  into  each  class,  that  number  depending  upon  length  of  service  and  rela- 
tive efficiency  and  present  classification.  We  have  assumed  that  certain  men 
would,  on  account  of  their  age,  retire  from  the  service  when  this  bill  is  put( 
into  operation.  Their  salaries  now  being  known,  and  their  length  of  service' 
being  a  matter  of  record,  it  is  not  difficult  to  calculate  when  they  reach  the 
age  of  65  and  retire  what  amount  they  would  draw  from  the  retirement  fund. 
Basing  our  calculations  upon  the  men  whom  we  think  would  unquestionably 
be  retired,  the  salaries  which  they  now  enjoy,  the  length  of  service  which  they 
have  had,  we  get  a  figure  which  brings  the  cost  of  the  retirement  for  the  first 
year  within  $50,000.  Then  calculating  the  contributions  from  the  service  at  5 
per  cent  of  'the  salaries  to  be  paid,  plus  4  per  cent  interest,  and  deducting  the 
annual  retirement  pay  from  that  we  find  that  the  first  appropriation  from!  the 
Government  after  the  $50,000  required  for  the  year  1924  would  be  due  between 
1935  and  1938.  The  maximum  appropriation  would  be  reached  in  1958  or  1960. 
The  appropriation  required  would  be  progressive  from  1935  to  1938,  and  reach  in 
1958  or  1960  the  maximum,  $378,000,  the  highest  annual  amount  that  this  system 
will  cost  the  Government  with  the  number  of  men  we  have  now,  and  based  on 
the  retirement  of  approximately  18  men  a  year. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  That  $378,000  includes  the  element  of  expense  in  this  bill  and 
not  really  the  retirement  element? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  $378.000  I  have  just  mentioned  is  the  maximum  Government 
share  of  the  retirement  cost  in  1958  or  1960.  The  $378,000  of  which  you  are 
now  speaking  is  the  total  immediate  cost  for  1924,  of  which  only  $50.000  is 
for  retirement  pay.  In  order  to  ascertain  just  what  the  last-mentioned  $378,000 
means,  let  us  deduct  $50,000  required  for  1924  for  starting  the  retirement 
system.  Then  we  have  left  $328,000,  made  up  of  a  small  increase  of  14  per 
cent  in  salaries  in  the  Consular  Service  and  a  much  greater  increase  in  the 
salaries  of  diplomatic  officers  in  order  to  bring  the  personnel  of  both  services 
into  this  unified  single-salary  scale.  We  figure  that  we  will  have  a  certain 
number  of  men  in  each  one  of  these  classes  of  foreign-service  officers  under 
this  new  classification,  a  certain  number  to  be  assigned  to  the  consular  branch 
and  a  certain  number  to  the  diplomatic  branch.  We  do  not  contemplate  having 
any  more  men.  but  do  contemplate  bringing  about  a  single-salary  scale ;  bring- 
ing about  Intel-changeability  between  the  two  services ;  breaking  down  the  wall 
between  the  two  services  which  now  seems  to  separate  them  into  water-tight 
compartments,  and  have  men  in  one  branch  unavailable  for  the  other  branch ; 
produce  better  morale;  afford  opportunity  for  greater  experience,  for  broader 
training,  and  give  a  greater  incentive  to  men  to  come  into  the  service  and  s( 
greater  incentive  to  men  to  stay  in  the  service  once  they  are  in. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Assume  this  bill  would  become  a  law.  Who  would  actually 
Classify  these  men? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  could  not  positively  tell  you  that,  but  I  should  say  that  probably 
the  Secretary  of  State  would  appoint  a  board  of  officers,  in  whom  he  had  confi- 


30 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 


deuce,  to  recommend  a  classification  of  officers  on  as  just  and  as  equitable  a 
basis  as  possible. 

The  CHAIRMAX.  And  the  action  of  that  board  would  be  submitted  to  the 
President  for  approval? 

Mr.  CABR.  Yes,  sir.  This  bill  provides  that  before  it  shall  take  effect  the 
Secretary  of  State  shall  report  to  the  President  the  names  of  those  men  who, 
because  of  their  efficient  service,  should  be  classified  and  recommissioned  as 
stated  in  this  bill,  and  to  report  the  names  of  those  other  men,  who  because 
they  have  not  measured  up  to  the  required  standard  of  efficiency  should  be 
either  reclassified  in  lower  classes  than  those  specified,  or  some  other  disposition 
be  made  of  them.  In  other  words,  it  would  put  into  law  the  principle  of  classi- 
fication and  of  promotion  for  efficiency,  which  is  not  now  in  the  law  and  which 
is  required  only  by  Executive  order,  and  which,  I  assume,  all  of  you  agree  is 
the  proi>er  thing  to  do.  It  would  place  upon  the  Secretary  of  State  in  his  rec- 
ommendation to  the  President  the  responsibility  for  the  determination  of  the 
just  and  proper  classification  of  each  officer  and  then  leave  the  President  in 
a  position  to  act  in  whatever  way  he  might  deem  proper.  Do  I  make  myself 
clear? 

Mr.  COLE.  What  proportion  of  the  retirement  fund  comes  out  of  the  employees? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  proportion  at  the  maximum  in  1958  or  1960  would  be  58  per 
cent  from  the  Government  and  42  per  cent  from  the  employees. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  How  does  that  compare  with  the  proportion  under  the  Lehlbach 
Act? 

Mr.  CARE.  There  would  be  $50,000  contributed  by  the  Government  for  the 
first  year.  After  that  the  contributions  from  the  men  would  carry  it  until 
1942  or  1943.  Then  there  would  become  necessary  a  small  annual  contribution 
from  the  Government,  which  would  reach  the  maximum  I  spoke  of  in  1958  or 
1960. 

Mr.  MOOKE.  Could  you  not  put  into  the  record  a  statement  showing  the  fore- 
cast in  detail  of  the  net  amounts  that  the  Government  would  have  to  pay  out 
from  year  to  year  after  the  plan  gets  into  operation,  assuming  that  it  will 
become  operative? 

Mr.  CABR,  I  am  glad  to  be  able  to  submit  this  statement. 

FOREIGN    SERVICE    RETIREMENT   SYSTEM. 


Statement  showing  estimated  annuities  payable  to  forei-ffii -service  officers  under 
the  proposed  retirement  system  prior  to  the  year  1944,  -which  will  be  paid 
solely  from  the  contributions,  with  interest  thereon,  of  such  officers. 


Fiscal  year,  ending  June  30— 

Annuities 
payable 
during 
year. 

Available 
retirement 
fund  from 
contributions 
with  interest 
compounded 
at  4  per  cent. 

Balance 
after 
payment  of 
annuities. 

Necessary 
appropria- 
tions. 

1924 

$61,  176.  41 

$143,719.85 

$82,543.44 

$50,000.00 

1925 

71  791  67 

229  405  80 

157  614.  13 

1926 

80  866  60 

307  343  20 

226  476  60 

1927                                     .  .  . 

86,633.43 

378,  873.  36 

292  219.93 

1928 

93  260  35 

446  654.93 

353  394.  58 

1929 

97  131  26 

510  257  20 

413  125  94 

1930 

101,  759.  00 

572,  762.  10 

471.003.10 

1931 

111  163.40 

632  812.27 

521  648.87 

1932 

116  355  09 

685  406  97 

569  051  S8 

1933 

129  925  29 

734  502  58 

604  577  28 

1934                                                         

14l'951.55 

77l'26S.OO 

629  316.  95 

1935 

149  410  66 

796  9^9  63 

64"  57$  97 

1936 

164  715  13 

815  902.  13 

651  267  00 

1937 

179,  978.  65 

819.  817.  68 

639.  839.  13 

1938                                                                     

199  987.  14 

807  932.70 

607  945.56 

1939 

212  814.00 

774  763  38 

561  949  38 

1940 

232  009  55 

726  927  36 

494  827  81 

1941                                              .              

24s!  431.  01 

657'  120.  92 

408,  689.  91 

4942 

265  266  43 

567  537.51 

302  271.  08 

1943 

yos  2iio  nn 

456  861  92 

148  652.  32 

1944  

346,  050.  10 

297,098.00 

48,951.69 

FOREIGN    SEE  VICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  31 

NOTE. — At  present  there  are  120  diplomatic  secretaries  and  520  consular  officers 
of  career  in  the  service,  making  a  total  of  640  officers  who  would  be  recom- 
missioned  as  foreign-service  officers  under  the  proposed  act.  The  average  age 
of  entry  into  the  service  of  these  officers,  who  have  entered  after  examination 
since  the  reorganization  act  of  April  5,  1906,  is  30  years;  and  it  is  assumed 
that  this  average  will  change  very  little  in  the  future,  if  at  all. 

The  estimated  average  annual  salary  at  the  age  of  retirement  of  those  foreign- 
service  officers  who  will  retire  during  the  next  20  years,  assuming  that  the  salary 
schedule  of  the  proposed  act  becomes  effective,  will  be  about  $5,300,  and  it 
is  believed  that  this  figure  will  not  vary  much  in  the  future.  Its  maximum 
certainly  will  not  rise  above  $5,500. 

Assuming  that  97  per  cent  of  the  640  foreign-service  officers  who  enter  the 
service  at  the  average  age  of  30  years  will  complete  35  years  of  service  before 
retirement  and  be  entitled  to  the  maximum  pension  of  the  salary  class  under 
the  proposed  act,  the  result  will  be  that  an  average  of  621  officers  will  serve  35 
years  each  and  receive  the  maximum  pension  of  their  respective  salary  class. 
Dividing  621  officers  by  35  years  gives  17.7,  the  average  number  of  officers  retir- 
ing annually,  and  17.7  multiplied  by  11.1  years,  or  the  average  years  of  ex- 
pectancy of  life  at  65  years  of  age,  gives  196  as  the  number  of  officers  who 
will  be  on  the  pension  list  when  the  maximum  is  reached  in  1959,  the  tlate  on 
which  the  officers  now  entering  the  service  become  pensionable. 

Assuming  that  when  the  service  reaches  its  highest  point  of  efficiency  under 
the  proposed  act,  the  average  maximum  salary  per  officer  will  reach  $5,500. 
the  average  annuity  under  the  proposed  act  of  each  officer  will  then  be  60  per 
cent  of  $5,500,  or  $3,300.  This  multiplied  by  196  officers,  the  highest  number 
which  will  ever  be  receiving  a  pension  at  one  time,  gives  $646,800  as  the  maximum 
amount  payable  in  any  one  year  for  pensions. 

The  salary  schedule  in  the  proposed  act  aggregates  $2,850,000  annually  for 
foreign-service  officers.  A  5  per  cent  contribution  for  this  will  amount  to 
$142,500  annually.  Therefore  when  the  contributions,  plus  interest  thereon 
from  1923  to  1943,  inclusive,  are  absorbed,  as  shown  in  the  above  table,  the 
Government  will  have  to  appropriate  annually  for  pensions  the  difference 
between  the  annual  contribution  of  $142,500  and  the  total  due.  As  already 
stated,  this  total  in  1958  will  reach  approximately  $646,800.  In  that  year  and 
for  all  following  years  the  appropriation  by  the  Government  will  have  to  be 
$646,800  less  $142,500,  or  $504,300. 

If  the  service  were  at  its  beginning  in  1923  and  all  officers  should  enter  at 
the  age  of  30  years  and  pay  their  contributions  of  5  per  cent  per  annum  of 
their  salaries  until  retirement,  the  Government  would,  of  course,  pay  out 
nothing  until  1959,  but  would  have  the  use  of  the  contributions  plus  4  per- 
cent compound  interest  thereon  until  that  date,  at  which  time  the  contributions 
plus  interest  would  amount  to  42  per  cent  of  the  total  to  be  paid  out  as  annui- 
ties. Therefore  the  actual  proportion  of  the  annuities  payable  to  foreign- 
service  officers  under  the  proposed  act  by  such  officers  and  by  the  Government, 
respectively,  after  taking  care  of  those  officers  now  in  the  service  who  will 
make  no  contributions  to  the  retirement  fund  or  will  contribute  for  a  part  only 
of  their  term  of  service,  will  be  about  42  and  58  per  cent. 

This  is  to  some  extent  conjectural,  because  obviously  one  can  not  know  what 
will  be  the  exact  condition  in  years  to  come.  What  I  have  said  to  you  has  been 
said  with  the  idea  that  it  is  a  conservative  statement  and  well  within  the 
probable  facts. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  You  speak  of  it  as  conjectural.  The  uncertainty  arises  out  of 
such  changes  of  personnel  as  might  come  which  can  not  be  foreseen? 

Mr.  CABR.  Certainly. 

Mr.  MOORES.  As  well  as  length  of  life — longevity? 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  And  expansion. 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  MOORES.  The  length  of  life  after  they  are  retired. 

Mr.  CARR.  It  does  not  take  into  consideration  expansion  of  the  service.  We 
are  dealing  now  with  a  given  number  of  men  and  apply  this  classification  to 
these  men,  adding  the  number  of  men  who  would  come  into  the  service  from 
year  to  year.  The  average  age  of  new  appointees  Mr.  Stewart  figures  as  30, 


32  FOREIGN   SERVICE  OF   THE  UNITED  STATES. 

who  would  presumably  stay  in  the  service  35  years.  The  conjectural  part  of 
this  estimate  is  how  many  would  drop  out  on  account  of  illness  and  death  and 
resignation. 

Mr.  MOORKS.  The  expansion  of  the  service  would  be  another  factor  that  you 
can  not  add  in  your  present  calculations. 

Mr.  GARB.  We  do  not  feel  in  position  to  make  prediction  about  that.  If  we 
could  get  this  service  with  the  existing  maximum  number  of  men,  developed  up 
to  the  standard  of  excellence  that  we  ought  to  attain,  I  doubt  whether  we 
should  want  many  additional  men.  I  can  not  look  forward  to  the  time  when 
any  particular  increase  would  be  necessary,  unless  changes  in  world  conditions 
call  into  existence  new  nations,  making  necessary  new  embassies,  legations,  and 
consulates,  in  which  case  Congress  would  naturally  provide  for  increased  per- 
sonnel. 

Mr.  MOOBES.  I  should  venture  the  opinion  that  the  lapses  would  be  just 
about  the  same  as  in  life  insurance. 

Mr.  ROGEBS.  Mr.  Skinner  suggests  that  there  is  heavier  mortality  in  any  for- 
eign serivce. 

Mr.  MOOBES.  I  did  not  mean  just  that. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  The  longevity  ought  to  be  the  same  as  in  general  walks  of  life, 
except  ifc  the  Tropics,  where  men  are  exposed  to  the  many  tropical  diseases  not 
encountered  elsewhere. 

Mr.  CABB.  I  might  say  that  Mr.  Stewart  tells  me  that  in  computations  made 
already  they  have  used  the  tables  of  mortality  employed  by  well-recognized 
life  insurance  companies. 

Mr.  MOOBES.  Including  the  tables  of  lapses? 

Mr.  NATHANIEL  B.  STEWART  (consul  general  detailed  to  the  State  Depart- 
ment). I  presume  you  mean  separations.  They  have  not  been  taken  into  con- 
sideration, because  they  lead  to  estimates  consisting  of  small  fractions.  We 
went  into  it  and  they  are  about  1  per  cent,  perhaps  less  than  that. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Can  you  tell  the  committee  what  the  relative  percentage  in  the 
Lehlbach  civil  retirement  bill  is  which  would  correspond  to  this  42  and  58? 

Mr.  CAKR.  I  am  not  able  to.    Are  you,  Mr.  Stewart? 

Mr.  STEWABT.  I  can  not  say. 

Mr.  ROGEBS.  I  think  it  would  be  an  interesting  comparison.  I  should  suppose 
that  the  contribution  which  you  exact  from  the  consuls  and  secretaries  is  a 
greater  relative  contribution  than  that  exacted  from  the  civil-service  employees? 

Mr.  STEWABT.  It  probably  is. 

Mr.  CABB.  Unquestionably  so,  because  the  contribution  exacted  from  civil- 
service  employees  is  based  largely  on  the  compensation  below  the  $2,000  class, 
whereas  the  amount  that  we  require  is  twice  the  percentage  that  is  required  by 
the  Lehlbach  bill,  and  is  applied  to  salaries  ranging  all  the  way  from  $2,500 
up  to  $9,000. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  think  we  ought  to  have  in  the  record  at  some  stage— I  do  not 
know  whether  you  are  ready  to  deal  with  it  now — a  statement  showing  the 
practices  of  other  nations  with  reference  to  retiring  their  foreign-service  officers ; 
also  a  table  showing  what  will  be  the  retiring  allowances  given  our  foreign- 
service  officers;  and  third,  a  table  showing  the  retirement  allowances  given  our 
Army  and  Navy  officers  of  various  ranks. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  can  very  easily  put  in  a  table  in  my  testimony,  if  you  prefer  to 
have  it  there,  giving  the  best  information  that  we  have  as  to  precisely  what 
those  allowances  are. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE    OF   THE   UNITED  STATES. 


33 


Table  showing  retirement  pay  of  British  consular  service  compared  toiJ/i  pro- 
posed  retirement  pay  of  United  States. 


Grade  of  officer. 

Salary  in 
British 
service. 

Repre- 
sentation 
allow- 
ance in 
British 
service. 

House 
and  rent 
allow- 
ance in 
British 
service. 

Total 
salary 
and 
emolu- 
ments. 

Proposed 

salary  in 
United 
States 
service. 

Maxi- 
mum 
pension 
in  British 
service. 

Proposed 
maxi- 
mum 
pension 
in  United 
States. 

Consuls  general  
Consuls  
Vice  consuls  

$7,299 
to 
$5,839 
4,866 
to 
3,893 
2,  919 
to 

$1,459 

1,216 

729 
to 

$1,216 

973 

973 
to 

$9,974 
to 
$8,514 
7,055 
to 
6,082 
4,621 
to 

$9,000 
to 
$7,000 
6,000 
to 
3,000 
3,000 
to 

$4,987 
to 
$4,257 
3,527 
to 
3,041 
2,310 
to 

$5,400 
to 
$4,200 
3,600 
to 
1,800 

[      (J) 

Interpreters,  student  interpre- 
ters, and  consular  assistants.  . 

1,459 

486 

486 

2,431 

2,500 
{3,000 
to 

1,215 

(i) 

1,500 

1  None  accruing  in  this  grade. 

NOTES.— There  is  no  contribution  required  from  officers  under  British  pension  system. 

In  the  British  service  the  pension  is  based  upon  salary  and  emoluments  at  time  of  retirement  or  on  average 
for  last  three  years  if  there  nas  been  a  change  within  that  period.  It  begins  upon  completion  of  10  years' 
service,  and  increases  by  an  annual  increment  of  one-eightieth  until  the  completion  of  40  years'  service, 
or  until  retirement.  This  applies  to  all  officers  who  have  entered  service  since  September  20, 1909.  All  officers 
appointed  before  that  date  receive  ten-sixtieths  of  their  retirement  pay  for  the  first  10  years'  service  and  one- 
sixtieth  for  each  year  thereafter  until  completion  of  40  years  or  until  retirement. 

In  the  British  service  retirement  is  voluntary  at  60  and  compulsory  at  65  unless  Government  wishes  to 
continue  an  officer  in  service  longer,  in  which  case  it  may  continue  him  by  intervals  until  he  is  70  years  of 
age. 

At  present,  because  of  conditions  resulting  from  the  war,  an  additional  allowance  to  those  mentioned  in 
the  above  table,  which  are  fixed,  is  granted  officers  at  a  number  of  posts.  This  additional  allowance  is  not 
pensionable  as  are  those  which  are  fixed.  As  an  illustration,  the  consul  general  at  New  York,  whose  salary 
is  £1,350  or  $6,569.77,  has  a  total  allowance  of  £4,000  or  $19,466,  making  his  total  compensation  $26,035.77. 
Of  the  allowance  only  the  fixed  sum  of  £550  or  $2,676.57  is  included  in  the  officer's  total  pensionable  salary 
and  emoluments  amounting  to  $9,246.34. 

Included  in  the  posts  to  which  special  allowances  of  considerable  importance  are  now  made  are  Buenos 
Aires,  Rio  de  Janeiro,  Mexico  City,  Petrograd,  Baltimore,  Boston,  Chicago,  Galveston,  New  Orleans, 
Philadelphia,  Portland,  and  San  Francisco.  Smaller  additional  allowances  than  those  at  the  posts  men- 
tioned are  also  granted  at  many  others. 

Pay  and  retirement  pay  of  United  States  Army  and  United  States  Navy  officer's. 


Annual 

Retire- 

Annual 

Retire- 

pay over 
30  years' 

ment 

Rank. 

30  years' 

ment 

service. 

pay. 

service. 

Army: 
General 

$13  500  00 

$10  125.00 

Navy: 
Rear  admiral  — 

Major  general  
Brigadier  general  

8,000.00 
6,000.00 

6.000.00 
4,500.00 

Upper  half  
Lower  half  

$8,000.00 
6,000.00 

$6,000.00 
4,  500.  00 

Colonel  

6,000.00 

4,500.00 

Captain  

6,000.00 

4,500.00 

Lieutenant  colonel  

5,  750.  00 

4,  312.  50 

Commander  

5,  750.  00 

4,312.50 

Major  

5,  250.  00 

3,  937.  50 

Lieutenant  commander.  . 

5,  250.  00 

3,937.50 

Captain  

4,500.00 

3,375.00 

Lieutenant  

4,  500.  00 

3,  375.  00 

3  600.  00 

2  700.00 

3,600.00 

2,  700.  00 

2  700  00 

2  025  00 

3  000.00 

2  250.  00 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  Showing  a  comparison  with  the  58  and  42  basis. 

Mr.  COLE.  It  is  50-50  as  a  general  proposition,  the  Government  half  and 
the  employees  half. 

Mr.  GARB.  That  is  about  what  it  works  out  at.  For  a  number  of  years  the 
employees  will  pay  practically  the  entire  expense. 

Mr.  COLE.  At  the  present  time  you  will  have  a  lot  of  men  in  the  service  a 
long  time  who  contribute  nothing. 

Mr.  CARE.  Exactly.  We  would  have  to  retire  about  35  men  at  once.  Mr. 
Stewart  tells  me  the  actual  number  is  30,  who  would  be  retired  because  of 
having  readier  the  age  of  retirement,  and  that  would  make  the  first  year 
of  operation  the  most  expensive  year  that  we  would  have.  That  arises  from 


34  FOEEIGX   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED  STATES. 

the  fact  that  many  years  ago  there  were  a  large  number  of  men  taken  into 
the  service  at  a  rather  advanced  age. 

The  CHAIKMAN.  Your  retirement  age  is  65,  under  the  bill? 

Mr.  CARR.  65. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  One  of  the  surprising  things  is  the  small  cost  of  these  re- 
tirements. 

Mr.  COLE.  Will  there  be  any  discretion  for  the  foreign  sen-ice  to  retain 
men  beyond  the  age  of  65,  or  is  it  compulsory? 

Mr.  CARR.  There  is  a  provision  in  the  Lehlbach  bill,  which  is  made  applica- 
ble to  this  bill,  giving  discretion  to  the  head  of  the  department  to  extend  for 
two  years  at  a  time  the  date  of  retirement. 

Mr.  MOORES.  For  not  to  exceed  10  years. 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  MOORES.  Does  the  language  of  this  bill  make  that  provision  applicable 
to  this  measure? 

Mr.  CARR.  We  have  sought  to  apply  the  provisions  of  that  bill  to  the  foreign 
service,  changing  the  retiring  age  from  70  to  65,  and  also  changing  the  percentage 
of  contribution  from  2%  to  5  per  cent,  and,  of  course,  the  resulting  rate  of 
retirement  pay.  In  other  respects,  we  have  sought  to  place  the  retirement 
of  the  foreign  service  entirely  under  the  provisions  of  the  Lehlbach  bill,  sub- 
ject to  the  modifications  in  respect  to  retiring  age.  rate  of  contribution  and 
rate  of  retirement  pay. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  should  like  to  ask,  with  reference  to  Mr.  Cole's  suggestion 
that  the  Government  practice  in  retirement  measures  is  a  basis  of  equal  con- 
tribution, if  the  analogy  of  the  retirement  contemplated  in  this  foreign  service 
bill  is  not  that  of  the  Army  and  Navy  officer  retirement,  rather  than  of  the 
civil-service  retirement?  Is  it  not  also  the  fact  that  there  is  no  contribution 
exacted  of  Army  and  Navy  officers  in  order  that  they  may  enjoy  their  retire- 
ment privileges? 

Mr.  MOORES.  That  is  also  true  of  judicial  officers  retired. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  In  other  words,  I  think  the  foreign  service  officer  is  really  a 
national  defense  officer  who  is  serving  in  a  far  country  where  his  conditions, 
away  from  home  and  business  and  often  even  from  his  family,  are  very. much 
akin  fundamentally,  in  the  heroism  that  he  must  at  times  display,  to  those 
under  which  Army  and  Navy  officers  serve 

Mr.  COCKKAX.  Heroism  which  he  often  mis  displayed. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  am  very  glad  you  made  that  remark,  because  it  gives  me  an  op- 
portunity to  express  my  own  personal  opinion  upon  a  point  in  regard  to  which 
I  entertain  strong  views.  I  have  never  been  able  to  convince  myself  that  there 
was  any  material  difference  in  the  right  of  a  foreign-sen-ice  officer  to  retire- 
ment pay,  irrespective  of  contributions  from  him,  and  the  right  of  an  Army  or 
Navy  officer  to  retirement  pay  in  like  circumstances.  Perhaps  we  could  not 
trace  so  clear  an  analogy  between  the  Army  officer  and  the  foreign-service 
officer,  but  we  can  trace  a  very  clear  analogy  between  the  foreign-service  officer 
and  the  Navy  officer.  Leaving  out  of  the  question  actual  war,  which  for- 
tunately occurs  very  seldom  and  we  hope  will  occur  with  less  frequency  in  the 
future,  a  Navy  officer  during  most  of  his  career  really  undergoes  perhaps  fewer 
hardships  and  is  subjected  to  fewer  dangers  that  .the  foreign-service  officer. 
That  is  particularly  true  in  respect  to  the  large  class  of  foreign-service  offi- 
cers, consular  officers  and  diplomatic  officers,  who  serve  in  tropical  i>osts.  A 
Navy  officer  cruising  about  the  world  has  at  all  times  the  benefit  of  the  best 
physicians  and  the  best  preventive  measures  that  Government  funds  can  give 
him,  but  a  foreign-service  officer  enjoys  no  such  advantages.  He  takes  up  his 
duties  at  some  place  on  the  west  coast  of  Africa  or  in  Central  or  South  America 
or  the  West  Indies  or  the  Dutch  East  Indies  or  elsewhere  in  tropical  and  unhealthy 
regions  and  has  to  live  there  and  do  the  best  he  can,  depend  upon  native 
physicians,  often  upon  native  modes  of  living,  and  take  his  chances  with  life. 
The  Navy  officer  will  not  even  put  his  vessel  into  such  a  port  without  the  assur- 
ance from  the  resident  consul  that  the  port  is  sufficiently  healthy  to  involve  no 
danger  to  the  health  of  the  officers  and  crew.  The  consuls  are  regularly  supply- 
ing information  in  regard  to  the  healthfulness  of  ports  which  vessels  of  the 
Navy  may  be  called  upon  to  visit.  Yet  the  Navy  retires  its  officers  at  three- 
fourths  pay.  and  the  foreign-service  officer,  if  he  reaches  the  age  of  retirement 
or  if  ability  to  do  his  work  ceases,  is  thrown  out  with  no  provision  made  for 
him.  I  do  not  think  it  is  fair.  We  ought  to  be  at  least  as  generous  to  that 
body  of  men  upon  whom  \ve  depend  from  year  to  year  to  keep  open  the  chan- 


FOREIGN   SERVICE  OF   THE   UNITED  STATES.  35 

nels  of  peaceful  and  friendly  relations  as  we  are  to  the  body  of  men  who  once  in 
a.  long  while  are  called  upon  to  fight  our  battles. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Do  you  not  think  it  possible  to  incorporate  in  the  bill  a  pro- 
vision that  the  consular  officer  who  lost  his  life  or  became  incapacitated  by 
reason  of  his  service  as  an  incident  to  the  service  should  enjoy  a  pension?  Do 
you  not  think  that  Congress  would  grant  that? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  do  not  know.     You  gentlemen  know  more  about  that  than  I  do. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  It  has  been  the  policy  to  make  contributions  to  the  family 
where  a  man  lost  his  life  in  the  service,  amounting  to  a  year's  salary. 

Mr.  COCKEAN.  That  is  very  small. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  That  has  only  recently  been  the  practice — within  the  last  four 

?r  five  years. 
Mr.  COCKRAN.  I  do  not  see  why  a  provision  should  not  be  added  here. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Referring  to  section  17,  pages  8  and  9  of  the  bill,  where  you 
fix  the  maximum  and  minimum  annuities,  what  is  the  purpose  of  having 
maximum  and  minimum  annuities? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  lowest  period  of  service  after  which  retirement  is  possible  is 
15  years.  That,  applied  to  the  lowest  rate  of  salary,  gives  the  minimum  re- 
tirement pay  in  a  class.  The  maximum  period  of  service,  applied  to  the  maxi- 
mum salary,  gives  the  maximum  retirement  pay.  This  bill  adopts  the  several 
classes  contained  in  the  Lehlbach  bill. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Who  will  determine  the  amount  the  employee  shall  receive? 

Mr.  CARR.  It  will  be  determined  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  or  the  Com- 
missioner of  Pensions  on  the  basis  of  the  man's  length  of  service,  age,  and 
salary  for  10  years  next  preceding  retirement.  When  he  gets  to  the  retirement 
age  the  amount  of  his  retired  pay  is  based  on  the  aVerage  amount  of  compen- 
sation he  has  been  receiving  for  the  past  10  years  and  the  length  of  time  he 
had  served. 

Mr.  COCKUAN.  That  is  a  question  I  was  about  to  ask,  whether  when  a  man 
gets  $4,800  or  $1,800  a  year,  the  amount  of  retirement  pay  depends  on  the 
length  of  service? 

Mr.  CABR.  Yes. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Does  the  bill  provide  for  a  man  getting  any  pension  before 
the  age  of  65  years? 

Mr.  CARR.  No ;  except  in  case  of  disability. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  It  does  in  case  of  disability? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes.  In  case  of  disability  he  can  retire  after  15  years'  service  at 
an  age  earlier  than  65,  and  he  may  then  get  such  a  proportion  of  the  amount 
which  he  would  be  entitled  to  at  the  age  of  65  as  his  average  salary  for  the 
past  10  years  and  the  length  of  service  would  entitle  him  to. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  think  it  would  clarify  this  point  if  I  read  a  section  from  the 
so-called  Lehlbach  Act  of  'May  22,  1920.  That  explains  what  this  classification 
means  and  on  what  it  is  based.  My  understanding  is  that  there  is  absolutely 
•nt  discretion  with  anybody.  It  is  a  pure  mathematical  matter  with  two 
factors,  one  the  man's  average  salary  for  10  years,  and  the  other  his  length  of 
service,  to  determine,  first,  in  what  class  he  is,  and,  second,  where  within  the 
maximum  or  minimum  of  that  class  he  comes  in  the  matter  of  retirement 
allowances.  Section  2  of  the  Lehlbach  bill  reads  as  follows : 

"  That  for  the  purpose  of  determining  the  ,'imouut  of  annuity  which  retired 
employees  shall  receive  the  following  classifications  and  rates  shall  be  estab- 
lished : 

"  Class  A  shall  include  all  empoyees  to  whom  this  act  apples  who  shall  have 
served  the  United  States  for  a  total  period  of  30  years  or  more.  The  annuity 
to  a  retired  employee  in  this  class  shall  equal  60  per  centum  of  such  employee's 
average  annual  basic  salary,  pay,  or  compensation  from  the  United  States 
for  the  10  years  next  preceding  the  date  on  which  he  or  she  shall  retire : 
Provided,  That  in  no  case  shall  an  annuity  in  this  class  exceed  $720  per 
•annum  or  be  less  than  $360  per  annum." 

Then  it  gives  the  maximum  and  minimum. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  What  section. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  ,  Section  2.  It  further  provides,  in  section  2,  that  class  B  shall 
apply  to  employees  who  have  served  the  United  States  for  from  27  to  30 
years,  and  that  such  class  B  employees  shall  receive  54  per  cent  of  their 
annual  salary.  Class  C  applies  to  all  .men  who  have  served  24  to  27  years, 
.and  the  corresponding  percentage  is  48.  Class  D  applies  to  men  who  have 


36  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

served  21  to  24  years,  and  the  percentage  is  42.  Class  E  applies  to  men  who 
have  served  the  United  States  from  18  to  21  years,  and  the  percentage  is  36. 
Class  F,  the  last  class,  includes  employees  who  have  served  15  to  18  years. 
and  the  percentage  is  30. 

That  summary  is  from  the  act  of  May  22.  1920.  chapter  19.~»,  section  2.  It 
applies  precisely  to  the  situation  that  we  find  in  section  17  of  this  bill,  except 
that  the  maximum  and  minimum  rates  vary. 

Mr.  GARB.  That  is  exactly  so.  May  I  also  read  part  of  section  6  of  the 
same  act,  answering  a  question  asked  about  the  circumstances  under  which 
extension  of  a  man's  service  might  be  made : 

"  *  *  *  Provided,  That  if  within  60  days  after  the  passage  of  this  act 
or  not  less  than  30  days  before  the  arrival  of  an  employee  at  the  age  of 
retirement,  the  head  of  the  department,  branch,  or  independent  office  of  the 
Government  in  which  he  or  she  is  employed  certifies  to  the  Civil  Service  Com- 
mission that  by  reason  of  his  or  her  efficiency  and  willingness  to  remain  in 
the  civil  service  of  the  United  States,  the  continuance  of  such  employee  therein 
would  be  advantageous  to  the  public  service,  such  employee  may  be  retained 
for  a  term  not  exceeding  two  years  upon  approval  and  certification  by  the 
Civil  Service  Commission,  and  at  the  end  of  two  years  he  or  she  may,  by 
similar  approval  and  certification,  be  continued  for  an  additional  term  no't 
exceeding  two  years,  and  so  on:  Provided  further,  That  at  the  end  of  10 
years  after  this  act  becomes  effective  no  employee  shall  be  continued  in  the 
civil  service  of  the  United  States  beyond  the  age  of  retirement  defined  in 
section  1  hereof  for  more  than  four  years." 

Mr.  COCKKAN.  One  question  about* a  matter  that  was  discussal  yesterday. 
How  many  consulates  of  the  United  States  are  there  doing  business  to  an 
extent  approaching  that  of  London? 

Mr.  CABB.  I  should  think  there  were  some  five  or  six  or  seven. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  That  do  business  on  anything  like  that  scale? 

Mr.  CABB.  Yes;  not  the  same  kind  of  business,  perhaps,  but  substantially 
equal  in  magnitude. 

The  CHAIBMAN.  Would  you  benefit  by  this  reclassification? 

Mr.  CARB.  Would  I? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Yes. 

Mr.   CABR.  Personally? 

The  CHAIBMAN.  Yes. 

Mr.  CARB.  No ;  I  am  not  in  the  Consular  Service. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  think  your  salary  is  a  disgrace  to  the  Government.  I 
wonder  if  there  is  not  some  way  we  could  fix  it  up. 

Mr.  CARB.  There  is  an  interest  and  joy  that  comes  from  this  work,  and  from 
endeavoring  to  render  a  service  without  regard  to  the  amount  of  money  that 
one  may  derive  from  it,  that  is  in  itself  a  rich  compensation.  We  can  not 
all  of  us  think  about  how  much  we  are  being  paid,  but  rather  of  what  the 
task  is  before  us  and  what  we  can  put  into  it 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  should  run  for  Congress. 

Mr.  GARB.  Have  I  said  now*  enough  about  the  retirement  feature  for  the 
moment?  If  so,  I  should  like  to  go  on  and  point  out  that  in  addition  to  the 
change  which  the  new  classification  would  produce — break  down  the  existing 
wall  between  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Services ;  bring  the  two  services 
together,  make  them  into  one;  apply  precisely  the  same  principles  of  adminis- 
tration to  both  branches ;  make  the  men  feel  that  they  are  not  superior  because 
they  are  in  the  diplomatic  service  and  have  the  advantage  of  diplomatic  im- 
munities, and  make  the  consular  men  feel  that  they  are  not  inferior  because 
they  are  in  the  Consular  Service  and  they  have  not  the  advantage  of  diplomatic 
immunities  and  can  not  go  to  court  or  do  many  other  things  which  some  people 
think  desirable,  but  that  they  may  some  day  aspire  not  only  to  transfer  to 
the  diplomatic  service  in  a  secretarial  position,  but  also  may  aspire  to  the 
grade  of  minister,  which  we  hope  this  bill  will  facilitate — in  addition  to  these 
advantages  the  entrance  to  this  service,  to  the  corps  of  foreign  service  officers, 
will  be  made  by  legislation,  by  act  of  Congress,  subject  to  examination  to  test 
the  fitness  of  the  candidate.  You  have  seen  the  examinations  tried  out  since 
1906  in  reference  to  the  Consular  Service,  and  since  1909  in  reference  to  the 
diplomatic  secretaries.  I  think  everyone  will  admit  that  it  has  brought  about 
a  great  improvement  in  the  service.  It  has  brought  into  the  service  a  superior 
class  of  men.  It  has  eliminated,  as  Secretary  Hughes  said  yesterday,  political 
considerations  from  the  selection  of  the  personnel,  and  it  has  improved  the 
entire  morale  and  the  efficiency  of  both  branches  of  the  service.  This  proposes 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  37 

that  the  examination  shall  be  stipulated  in  the  law  itself  as  a  condition  of 
entrance  into  foreign  service  officer  corps. 
Mr.  COCKRAN.  As  applied  by  this  bill? 
Mr.  CABR.  Yes. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  The  bill  prescribes  the  scope  of  the  examinations? 
Mr.  CARE.  No ;  not  the  scope ;  only  the  fact  that  admission  shall  be  by  exami- 
nation.    The  scope  would  be  prescribed  by  the  President,  which  is,  I  believe, 
the  sound  way  to  deal  with  that  subject. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  You  speak  of  this  improvement.  In  what  way  is  that  evi- 
denced— by  what  net  result  to  the  general  public? 

Mr.  CABR.  The  improvement  has  been  this :  Before  the  system  of  examinations 
for  entry  into  the  service  was  in  existence  men  were  selected  without  exami- 
nation, sent  to  particular  posts  to  continue  to  serve  there  until  the  political 
party  then  in  power  should  change.  Then,  as  a  rule,  the  gentlemen  were 
brought  home  and  others  were  sent  out  in  their  places,  selected  in  the  same 
way,  to  continue  at  particular  posts  to  which  they  were  sent  until  again  a 
change  of  administration  occurred,  when  there  was  still  another  sweeping 
change.  There  was  no  service  spirit,  continuity  of  service,  or  accumulated 
experience.  That  has  all  disappeared.  A  man  now  goes  into  the  service  pre- 
cisely as  into  the  Army  and  Navy — except  that  he  does  not  go  to  West  Point  or 
Annapolis — after  an  examination  to  test  his  personal,  mental,  and  physical  fit- 
ness, with  the  implied  agreement  that  he  shall  go  wherever  ordered.  He  may 
serve  one  year  in  France ;  the  next  year  duty  may  take  him  to  Germany ;  and 
after  three  years  there  duty  may  take  him  to  South  America,  and  so  on.  He 
becomes  a  foreign  service  soldier,  if  you  please.  He  is  not  restricted  to  any 
particular  country  or  to  any  particular  locality.  He  obtains  a  broad  grasp 
of  international  affairs,  economic  conditions,  and  develops  gradually  into  a 
much  superior  officer  than  would  have  been  possible  under  the  old  system. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  I  want  to  see  where  the  superiority  consists.  The  fact  that 
he  is  sent  through  in  this  method  does  not  establish  superiority.  It  shows  a 
difference  in  the  method  of  appointment.  Can  you  tell  us  just  in  what  way 
the  superiority  of  these  officers  is  established,  their  superiority  in  actual 
service? 

Mr.  CARR.  Their  actual  work  is  better  performed. 
Mr.  COCKRAN.  In  what  respect? 

Mr.  CARR.  By  a  more  accurate  and  more  intelligent  performance  of  their 
work. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  is  very  important.  I  would  like  to  get  that  somewhat  in 
detail,  because  I  myself  have  the  general  idea  that  no  men  should  be  allowed 
in  the  civil  service  of  any  kind  for  more  than  a  few  years.  You  spoil  him  and 
do  not  improve  the  service.  But  that  is  a  matter  to  be  tested  by  actual  expe- 
rience. What  I  would  like  to  get  from  you,  if  you  have  any  means  of  furnish- 
ing the  information,  is  just  to  what  extent  and  in  what  specific  ways  the 
service  shows  an  improvement  from  this  method  of  appointment  by  examina- 
tion. 

Mr.  CARR.  It  shows  an  improvement,  in  the  first  place,  in  that  the  officers 
possess  better  knowledge  of  foreign  languages.  There  are  many  more  men 
to-day  who  are  able  to  speak  the  language  of  the  country  to  which  they  go  than 
there  were  in  the  old  days.  Then  there  is  the  question  of  personality.  The 
men  now  average  a  higher  personality. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  What  do  you  mean  by  that,  exactly?  That  is  just  one  of 
those  phrases  which  always  puzzled  me. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  mean  personality  as  indicated  by  culture,  education,  refinement, 
high  moral  character,  if  you  please,  a  combination  which  may  roughly  be  called 
personality,  and  with  it  there  is  a  greater  professional  efficiency,  a  greater,  a 
more  intimate  knowledge  of  the  diplomatic  and  consular  functions,  and  therefore 
the  diplomatic  and  consular  business  can  be  carried  with  more  efficiency  than 
in  the  old  days.  There  are  to-day  fewer  lapses  in  personal  conduct  than  in 
the  old  days.  There  is  no  more  of  the  old  difficulty  we  used  to  have  of  men 
pursuing  private  business,  private  law  practice  in  foreign  countries,  instead  of 
giving  their  entire  time  to  furthering  the  interests  of  the  Government  itself. 
There  are  all  of  these  things  and  many  others  I  do  not  think  of  just  at  the 
moment  which  make  the  existing  service  vastly  better  than  the  former  one. 
Mr.  TEMPLE.  Wide  experience. 

Mr.  CARR.  The  same  sort  of  condition  that  you  have  in  the  practice  of  law. 
A  man  starts  in  the  practice  of  law,  and  if  he  is  a  student,  a  cultured  man, 
applies  himself  industriously,  he  becomes  a  trained  and  able  member  of  his 


38  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

profession  as  the  years  go  on.  The  Government  to-day  is  getting  the  benefit 
of  better  professional  service  from  both  the  diplomatic  and  consular  officers 
by  reason  of  their  broader,  more  varied  experience,  and  their  constant,  indus- 
trious application  to  the  work  involved  in  protecting  and  advancing  the  interests 
of  the  Government. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  Would  you  exclude  them  from  professional  work  of  any  kind? 

Mr.  CAKB.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  What  would  you  consider  professional  work  on  the  part  of  a 
secretary  or  consul?  Their  work  is  practically  clerical  work: 

Mr.  CABB.  No.  If  it  were  clerical  work  I  would  not  be  before  you  to-day 
advocating  this  bill  or  these  salaries.  What  I  want  to  see  is  what,  I  take  it,  we 
all  want  to  see  in  the  foreign  service 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  That  is  efficiency. 

Mr.  CABB.  The  highest  intelligence  and  the  highest  character  that  we  can 
bring  into  our  consular  and  diplomatic  offices,  because  it  is  through  high  intelli- 
gence, through  acute  intellect,  clear  insight  into  the  motives  of  men,  forecasting 
of  movements  in  foreign  politics,  and  of  changes  in  economic  conditions  abroad 
that  we  shall  be  able  to  protect  our  own  interests  and  be  of  real  service  to  the 
rest  of  the  world. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  It  goes  without  saying  that  we  want  higher  intelligence. 

Mr.  CABB.  We  want  to  obtain  for  this  work  the  highest  intelligence  this 
country  possesses,  and  even  with  that  there  will  be  too  many  times  when  we 
shall  lack  proper  guidance  and  adequate  information. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  It  goes  without  saying  that  we  want  the  highest  intelligence 
in  any  occupation  or  employment,  whatever  it  may  be.  My  question  was,  If  you 
had  any  statistics  or  any  information  which  shows  that  this  method  of  appoint- 
ment, which  has  now  been  in  vogue  for  some  10  years 

Mr.  CABB  (interposing).  Since  1906. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  Whether  it  shows  a  higher  order  of  service  than  before. 

Mr.  CABB.  Exactly. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  If  you  have  anything  that  will  show  that,  I  will  be  glad  to 
have  it.  We  will  not  have  any  discussiou  of  the  fact  that  we  want  in  any 
occupaiton,  whatever  it  may  be,  the  very  highest  form  of  intelligence  and  the 
highest  efficiency.  My  inquiry  is  directed  to  the  point  of  whether  this  change 
in  the  system  of  appointment  has  worked  a  change  in  the  improvement  of  the 
service  and,  if  so,  in  what  particular? 

Mr.  CABB.  I  do  not  know  whether  I  can  tell  you  in  more  definite  form. 

Mr.  COOPEB.  Can  you  do  this?    The  method  was  adopted  on  a  certain  date? 

Mr.  CABB.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  COOPEB.  Prior  to  that,  there  was  a  certain  amount  of  business  done  by 
consuls  and  various  ministers,  and  done  with  a  certain  amount  of  intelligence. 
Immediately  after  this  new  method  was  adopted,  the  question  was  whether 
from  that  time  there  was  a  decided  improvement  that  might  be  fairly  attributed 
to  it? 

Mr.  CABB.  I  can  not  produce  proof  of  that  by  laying  any  papers  or  any  data 
before  you  at  the  present  time. 

Mr.  COOPEB.  We  will  take  your  statement. 

Mr.  CABB.  I  can  give  you  my  view,  and  I  have  been  in  the  service  30  years. 
25  of  which  have  been  devoted  more  particularly  to  this  branch  of  the 
work.  I  know  of  my  own  knowledge  what  the  change  has  been.  I  know  of  my 
own  knowledge  how  the  reports  of  consuls  have  been  improved  over  what  they 
were.  I  know  of  my  own  knowledge,  for  instance,  how  greatly  the  profes- 
sional or  technical  proficiency  of  the  men  has  improved  over  that  of  the  old 
days.  I  know  how  much  the  average  of  excellence  has  increased  over  that 
of  the  old  days.  I  know  how  much  the  spirit  of  service  has  changed  from  that 
of  the  old  days.  I  know  a  great  many  men,  for  example,  who  are  devoting 
themselves  day  and  night  to  the  service  of  the  Government  and  placing  that 
duty  above  every  other  consideration,  when  in  the  old  days  there  were  dozens 
of  them  pursuing  their  private  interests  rather  than  the  Government  interests, 
who  used  the  office  of  secretary  or  of  consul  merely  as  a  convenience  enabling 
them  to  draw  a  salary  and  live  abroad  for  their  own  pleasure.  Those  are 
some  of  the  improvements. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  Those  are  very  important.  If  you  know  those  of  your  own 
knowledge,  that  is  very  important  and  a  valuable  contribution  to  the  inquiry, 
just  what  I  was  trying  to  get. 

Mr.  CABB.  I  might  say,  if  you  were  to  summon  here  representatives  of 
chambers  of  commerce,  representatives  of  large  business  houses  who  have  had 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES.  39 

contact  with  consuls,  I  think  you  would  get  unmistakable  evidence  of  their 
opinions  of  the  very  great  improvement  that  has  taken  place. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  Do  you  think  the  reports  are  better  from  the  consular  officers 
and  more  complete  under  this  system  than  before? 

Mr.  CARR.  There  is  not  a  shadow  of  a  doubt  of  it.  I  am  sending  every  month 
to  the  Department  of  Commerce  approximately  2,000  reports  from  our  con- 
suls in  regard  to  trade  conditions  abroad  which  are  being  made  use  of,  and 
most  of  them  receive  a  great  deal  of  commendation.  That  is  just  one  phase 
of  our  work.  During  the  war,  without  the  more  highly  trained  and  experienced 
men  we  should  have  made  a  sad  spectacle  of  carrying  our  foreign  relations. 
Without  the  so-called  professional  consul  and  the  professional  diplomatic  secre- 
taries, we  should  have  made  a  sad  spectacle  of  ourselves  in  the  complicated 
business  which  the  war  cast  upon  us,  business  which  a  man,  however  able,  who 
is  lacking  experience  and  technical  knowledge  can  not  take  up  and  carry  on 
with  anything  like  the  efficiency  of  a  man  who  has  had  long  training  in  the 
work.  It  is  precisely  the  same  sort  of  thing  as  a  lawyer  attempting  to  go  into 
court  and  argue  a  complicated  case,  who  has  not  had  the  requisite  experience 
to  qualify  him  for  that  task. 

Mr.  COCKBAX.  It  all  turns  on  whether  special  training  is  necessary  in  that 
case,  the  same  as  with  any  professional  man,  and  you  have  now  indicated  some 
evidence  that  it  is.  I  arn  very  glad  to  hear  it. 

Mr.  CARR.  Every  government  which  is  a  competitor  of  this  Government  for 
a  share  of  the  commerce  of  the  world,  or  who  has  vital  interests  involved  in 
the  political  adjustments  of  the  world,  has  preceded  us  in  the  organization  and 
professionalization  of  its  foreign  service.  The  other  great  governments  have 
gone  further  even  than  we  have. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  They  have  maintained  it  almost  ever  since  they  had  a  foreign 
service,  but  we  have  done  extraordinary  things  in  this  country  and  do  extraor- 
dinary things  by  methods  distinctively  our  own.  and  I  am  prejudiced  against 
any  effort  to  change  a  system  which  has  been  the  envy  of  the  world.  We  have 
had  our  particular  experience.  We  are  not  discussing  the  method.  We  have 
had  it  in  actual  operation,  and  my  question  was  to  find  "out  whether  you,  in 
charge  of  this  machinery,  had  any  tangible  evidence  of  benefits  arising  from  a 
change  in  the  method  of  appointment? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  do  not  think  there  is  any  comparison  at  all  between  the  service 
under  the  kind  of  organization  now  existing  and  that  proposed  by  this  bill  and 
the  service  under  the  kind  of  organization  in  existence  prior  to  1906.  The 
superiority  of  the  so-called  professional  service  is  very  great. 

Mr.  MOORES.  Do  not  the  nations  which  pursue  our  present  plan  carry  the 
trade  of  the  world? 

Mr.  CARR.  Certainly. 

Mr.  MOORES.  And  we  have  no  commerce  worthy  of  the  name. 

Mr.  CARR.  Our  organization  is  similar  to  that  of  France,  Great  Britain, 
Italy 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  Not  the  system  now  in  existence.     It  is  modeled  on  it. 

Mr.  CARR.  It  is  modeled  on  it,  but  more  democratic. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  How  more  democratic  than  the  English  system? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  English  system,  although  they  have  changed  it  recently,  has 
had  money  qualifications. 

Mr.  COOKRAX.  Did  they  have  that? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Do  you  mean  for  consuls? 

Mr.  CARR.  They  had  for  diplomatic  officers  and  I  think,  for  the  consuls,  too. 

Mr.  SKIXNER.  I  know  they  had  in  the  far  eastern  service. 

Mr.  CARR.  In  all  the  diplomatic  service  they  had  a  money  qualification  for 
entry-  A  candidate  must  have  a  certain  income.  That  they  have  tried  recently 
to  get  rid  of,  and  I  believe  a  private  income  is  no  longer  required.  If  that  is 
so  their  service  in  that  respect  is  more  democratic  than  ours.  Mr.  Skinner 
suggests  that  another  requirement  in  England  is  that  of  belonging  to  the  right 
families. 

Mr.  COCKKAX.  That  was  recognized.  That  was  a  system  that  was  enforced 
without  being  prescribed. 

Mr.  CARR.  Of  course,  we  do  not  want  that  sort  of  system.  We  should  insist 
upon  having,  I  think,  a  system  which  would  permit  well  educated,  highly  intel- 
ligent young  men.  with  industry,  whether  they  have  private  means  or  not,  to 
enter  either  the  diplomatic  or  consular  branch  on  precisely  the  same  basis  and 

24470—22 4 


40  FOEEIGX   SERVICE   OF   THE   UXITED   STATES. 

advance  on  their  merit  even  to  the  grade  of  ambassador  if  they  show  the  requi- 
site qualifications  for  that  high  office. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  Is  this  a  competitive  system? 

Mr.  CABE.  It  is  not  a  competitive  system,  in  that  anyone  applying  may  enter 
the  examination.  The  candidates  are  all  designated  for  admission  to  the  ex- 
amination. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  Who  designates  them? 

Mr.   CABR.  The  President. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  Then  it  is  practically  a  system  of  appointments  except  that 
there  is  a  test  of  efficiency,  which  each  one  must  go  through.1 

Mr.  C^RR.  Not  that.  The  designation  seeks  to  weed  out  those  manifestly 
unfit  for  this  service. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  That  is  the  theory  of  every  method  of  appointment. 

Mr.  GARB.  This  system  might  be  termed  selective  admission  to  the  examina- 
tion. Even  then  but  a  small  proportion  of  those  who  are  actually  admitted  to 
the  examinations  succeed  in  becoming  eligible  for  appointment.  Last  summer 
for  the  Consular  Service  some  one  hundred  candidates  appeared  of  whom  only 
about  12  succeeded  in  making  the  eligible  mark. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Did  those  12  get  places,  receive  appointments? 

Mr.  GARB.  I  think  all  of  them  have  received  appointments,  if  I  remember 
correctly.  Their  names  go  on  the  eligible  list  in  the  order  of  their  rating  and 
they  are  drawn  in  that  order. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  There  is  no  political  test? 

Mr.  GARB.  No. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Whatever  the  administration  the  selection  is  made  in  that  way. 

Mr.  GARB.  A  gentleman  asked  me  this  morning  what  proportion  of  the  men 
in  the  service  were  Republicans  and  what  proportion  Democrats.  I  could  not 
say ;  I  do  not  know. 

Mr.  COLE.  What  are  the  ages  for  examination? 

Mr.  CABB.  For  examination  for  the  Consular  Service  the  age  limit  is  21  to 
50 ;  for  the  diplomatic  service  21  to  35. 

Mr.  MOOBES.  What,  if  any,  of  the  larger  universities  have  special  courses  of 
preparation  for  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Service?  Are  there  any? 

Mr.  CABR.  Yes.  George  Washington  University  and  Georgetown  University 
have  very  elaborate  courses ;  also,  the  American  university  has  excellent 
courses.  New  York  University  has  a  course ;  Columbia  gives  a  number  of 
special  courses  leading  to  preparation  for  the  foreign  service ;  Harvard  offers 
excellent  courses;  Yale  formerly  did — I  do  not  know  how  extensive  their 
course  now  is;  the  University  of  California  offers  an  elaborate  course;  and 
I  think  the  University  of  Illinois  and,  perhaps,  Northwestern  University  and 
Michigan  do  some  work  along  that  line.  The  University  of  Pennsylvania  has 
offered  work  for  foreign-service  training  for  years,  as  has  also  Princeton. 
I  think  there  are  others.  I  do  not  happen  to  remember  them  at  the  moment, 
but  the  principal  universities  of  the  country  give  courses  of  study  fitting  men 
for  the  foreign  service. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  There  was  some  discussion  yesterday  by  Secretary  Hughes  as 
to  the  practical  means  of  providing  incomes  for  ambassadors,  ministers,  and 
secretaries.  As  to  the  Consular  Service,  is  it  possible  for  a  man  to  represent 
his  country  with  dignity,  especially  if  he  is  married  and  has  a  child  or  two,  on 
the  salary  scale  which  is  now  prevailing  unless  he  has  private  means? 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Do  you  mean  the  scale  now  prevailing  or  the  one  proposed? 

Mr.  ROGERS.  The  one  now  prevailing. 

Mr.  CABB.  It  is  being  done  in  most  places.  It  could  be  done  better  if  the  men 
had  either  private  means  or  higher  salaries. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  You  do  not  consider  in  appointing  consuls,  as  perhaps  you  do 
in  appointing  a  secretary,  whether  he  has  private  means? 

Mr.  CABB.  No ;  I  do  not.  There  is  no  money  qualification  whatever  for  ad- 
mission to  the  Consular  Service  or  in  appointing  men  to  the  Consular  Service. 
There  ought  not  to  be  for  either  service.  Siich  a  qualification  at  once  narrows 
the  range  of  selection  and  inevitably  results  in  the  United  States  being  repre- 
sented abroad  by  men  representative  of  the  wealthy  and  exclusive  social  circles. 
The  Government  will  gain  enormously  by  paying  sufficient  compensation  to 
make  intellectual  and  personal  fitness  the  primary  qualification  for  admission 
to  the  foreign  service. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  The  President  designates  them  for  examination.  How  does  he 
designate  them,  draw  them  out  of  a  bag?  They  are  recommended,  are  they 
not? 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED  STATES.  41 

Mr.  CABB.  The  designation  in  the  name  of  the  President  is  actually  made  by 
one  of  the  assistant  secretaries  of  State,  upon  personal  examination  of  the 
application,  and  the  papers  attached  to  the  application. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  Suppose  "AB,"  a  young  man  of  20  or  21  years  of  age,  wishes 
to  enter  the  service.  He  knows  nobody,  has  no  particular  political  friends, 
but  has  a  very  high  order  of  intelligence.  How  would  he  set  about  getting  into 
the  service? 

Mr.  CABB.  He  would  put  in  his  application.  The  application  requires  that  he 
shall  present  along  with  it,  I  think,  five  letters  from  people  who  know  him, 
telling  what  sort  of  a  person  he  is,  what  he  has  done,  etc.  The  application 
would  be  examined.  Suppose  it  should  appear  from  the  application  that  he  has 
had,  let  us  say,  only  public-school  education;  the  form  of  expression  and  the 
handwriting  show  quite  clearly  that  he  is  not  such  a  man  as  could  pass  such  an 
examination  as  we  give.  It  is  a  hardship  to  that  man  to  let  him  come  up  for 
examination.  Therefore  he  is  not  designated.  Let  us  take  another  man  that 
\ve  know  nothing  about,  but  it  shows  that  he  has  got  a  good  education,  ex- 
presses himself  well  in  his  application,  appears  to  be  well  fitted  mentally.  We 
designate  him  without  any  question  regardless  of  whether  he  appears  to  be  a 
Democrat,  Republican,  or  Populist. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Would  it  hurt  him  any  if  he  had  a  letter  from  the  chairman 
of  this  committee? 

Mr.  CABB.  It  would  not  hurt  him. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  Or  from  somebody  else  prominent  in  public  affairs.  It  really 
gets  back  very  much  to  the  old  situation,  except  that  you  have  the  test  of 
examination.  That  is  a  very  good  thing. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  There  is  the  fact  that  88  out  of  100  were  rejected  at  the  last 
examination. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  should  benefit  the  efficiency  of  the  service. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  The  committee  will  meet  again  to-morrow  morning  at  10  o'clock. 

(Thereupon,  at  12  o'clock  noon,  the  committee  adjourned  to  meet  again  at 
10  o'clock  a.  m.,  Wednesday,  December  12,  1922.) 


COMMITTEE  ox  I^OREIGN  AFFAIRS, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 
Washington,   Wednesday.  December  13,  1922. 

The  committee  this  day  met,  Hon.  Stephen  G.  Porter,  chairman,  presiding. 
The  CHAIRMAN.  The  committee  will  be  in  order. 

STATEMENT   OF   MB.    WILBUR  J.    CABB,    DIBECTOB   OF    THE    CON- 
SULAR SEBVICE,  DEPABTMENT  OF  STATE — Besumed. 

Mr.  GARB.  Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen,  yesterday  I  stopped  with  section  5 
of  the  bill,  which  deals  with  the  question  of  examinations  for  appointment  as 
foreign-service  officers.  I  would  like  now  to  take  up  section  6. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Before  you  begin  with  section  6,  your  discussion  yesterday  was 
confined  in  the  main  to  an  analysis  of  the  practice  in  consular  examinations. 
As  I  understand  it,  the  practices  of  the  department  are  substantially  identical 
in  the  case  of  examinations  for  secretary. 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes;  it  is  identical  with  one  exception,  and  that  is  that  the  char- 
acter of  the  examination  for  the  Diplomatic  Service  is  slightly  different  from 
that  of  the  Consular,  owing  to  differences  in  duties  required  of  diplomatic 
officers. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Have  you  any  impression  as  to  how  numerous  the  applicants 
for  positions  have  been  on  the  secretarial  side  of  the  department? 

Mr.  GARB.  They  have  not  been  very  numerous.  That  is  to  say.  there  is  no 
great  demand  to  get  into  the  Diplomatic  Service.  I  have  not  the  statistics 
before  me.  I  shall  be  glad  to  insert  in  the  record  the  number  of  candidates 
who  were  admitted  to  the  examinations  and  the  number  who  were  successful 
in  the  examinations.  But  there  is  quite  a  difference  in  the  number  who  ap- 
plied for  the  Diplomatic  Service  and  the  number  who  applied  for  the  Consular 
Service. 


FOREIGX   SERVICE   OF  THE   UNITED  STATES. 
Diplomatic  Service  entrance  examination  statistics. 


Date  of  examination. 

Number 
desig- 
nated. 

Number 
actually 
taking. 

Number 
passed. 

INumbe  i 
ap- 
i  pointed. 

May  19-21,  1919 

17 

12 

9 

9 

May  26-31  1919  at  Paris  France 

181 

181 

24 

13 

Jan.  26-28,'  1920.'  '.  

19 

11 

7 

7 

Oct.  18-21,  1920  

26 

17 

13 

13 

July  11-15,  1921     .  .  . 

48 

42 

17 

17 

July  10-13,  1922 

41 

34 

12 

10 

Aug  .  16-18,  1922  

5 

2 

1 

1 

Total  .     . 

337 

299 

83 

70 

Mr.  ROGERS.  How  do  you  account  for  that  difference? 

Hi*.  CARR.  I  should  say  in  the  first  place  the  men  who  apply  for  the  Consular 
Service  have  a  better  career  ahead  of  them,  for  one  thing.  They  enter  at 
substantially  the  same  rate  of  compensation,  as  a  man  would  enter  the  diplo- 
matic service.  They  may  go  on  through  the  various  grades  of  the  service 
and  aspire  to  an  $8,000,  or,  possibly,  even  a  $12.000  consul  generalship.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  diplomatic  officers  may  certainly  aspire  only  to  the  $4,000 
grade,  a  secretaryship,  with  the  added  designation  of  counsellor.  He  can  not 
count  certainly  upon  rising  to  the  position  of  head  of  a  mission — a  minister. 
for  instance,  of  class  2,  $10,000.  So  that  the  group  of  men  interested  in  the 
diplomatic  service  is  very  restricted,  restricted  both  by  the  compensation 
offered  and  the  opportunity  for  advancement  which  is  afforded. 

Mr.  KOGEBS.  You  would  expect  that  the  result  of  legislation  like  this  would 
be  to  broaden  very  much  the  range  of  selection  and  increase  the  number  of 
those  who  would  apply? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  would  expect  that  this  legislation  would  accomplish  this  pur- 
pose in  respect  to  the  Consular  Service,  that  it  would  retain  all  the  advantages 
we,  have  now  and  give  the  added  advantage  of  retirement  pay,  and  the  further 
advantage  of  the  possibility  of  being  advanced  to  the  grade  of  minister  in  the 
case  of  consular  officers  who  should  possess  outstanding  qualifications  for 
diplomatic  work.  Then  in  the  diplomatic  service  we  would  retain  all  that 
we  have  now  by  way  of  test  of  fitness  for  admission  and  promotion  on  merit, 
and  we  would  add  the  advantages  of  higher  salaries,  which  would  widen  the 
range  of  selection  by  interesting  men  who  can  not  now,  because  of  lack  of 
sufficient  private  means  aspire  to  careers  in  the  diplomatic  service,  although 
they  may  have  all  the  other  qualities  that  are  desired  in  that  service;  that  by 
opening  the  services  to  keener  competition  for  admission  to  it  and  promotion 
in  it  there  would  be  afforded  greater  opportunity  to  become  head  of  mission ; 
that  is,  minister;  there  would  be  the  certainty  of  retirement  on  modest  com- 
pensation when  the  retirement  age  should  be  reached  after  35  years  of  service. 
So  that  we  should,  under  the  proposed  plan,  have  the  advantages  that  we  have 
now,  plus  those  offered  by  better  salaries,  better  opportunity  for  advancement, 
and  a  retirement  system  for  both  branches  of  the  service. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  In  order  that  there  might  be  a  record  of  the  fact!  I  want  to  ask 
you  about  this  one  provision.  Section  5  provides  that  appointments  to  the  for- 
eign service  should  be  made  after  examination  or  by  transfer  from  the  Depart- 
ment of  State.  How  are  men  appointed  in  the  Department  of  State,  in  the 
first  place;  by  examination,  or  otherwise? 

Mr.  CARR.  They  are  now  appointed  through  the  ordinary  civil-service  pro- 
cedure. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  By  examination? 

Mr.  CARR.  By  examination  up  to  the  grade  of  drafting  officer,  I  think,  at 
$2.500.  Beyond  that  grade  they  are  not  appointed  by  examination ;  they  are 
appointed  subject  to  civil-service  rules,  but  without  examination.  Now,  I 
would  suggest  that  this  paragraph  be  amended  so  as  to  require  a  certain 
amount  of  service  in  the  State  Department.  For  instance,  10  years'  service  in 
the  State  Department  would  be  equivalent  to  a  certain  amount  of  experience 
and  could  be  accepted  in  lieu  of  examination.  I  do  not  care  what  it  is  made, 
so  long  as  this  paragraph  is  amended  to  place  adequate  restriction  upon  making 
State  Department  service  of  a  few  months,  or  even  a  year  or  so,  the  means  of 
evading  the  examination. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  Something  that  might  make  a  side-door  entrance? 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  43 

Mr.  CAER.  Yes;  into  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Services.  That  should  be 
prevented,  because  it  would  destroy  the  very  object  we  are  all  seeking  to 
attain,  that  of  getting  qualified  men  into  service  and  putting  every  man  on  a 
plane  of  equality  in  regard  to  admission  and  advancement  in  the  service.  So 
in  that  respect  I  would  suggest  an  amendment,  whether  you  say  10  or  5  years' 
service,  or  through  some  other  provision,  I  do  not  care  what  it  is,  so  long  as  it 
accomplishes  the  results  that  I  have  just  mentioned.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is 
now  the  rule  to  accept  service  in  the  State  Department  as  the  equivalent  of 
the  examination,  and  I  think  it  is  very  desirable  that  no  change  in  principle 
should  be  made,  but  that  the  application  of  the  principle  be  safeguarded. 

Mr.  BROWNE.  Does  the  Civil  Service  Commission  correct  papers  in  these 
examinations  for  consuls,  or  does  the  State  Department? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  Civil  Service  Commission  examines  and  reads  all  of  the  writ- 
ten papers  in  these  diplomatic  and  consular  examinations.  The  examining 
board  appointed  by  the  President  for  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Service 
makes  the  rating  in  the  oral  examination.  The  average  of  the  two  examina- 
tions must  equal  80  per  cent  in  order  that  the  candidate  should  attain  eligibility. 
So  to  that  extent  the  Civil  Service  Commission  examines  papers. 

Mr.  BROWNE.  Would  the  Civil  Service  Commission  really  have  the  knowledge 
to  correct  papers  and  give  markings  such  as  desired? 

Mr.  CARR.  They  have  ample  facilities  for  handling  the  written  examination 
papers.  They  are  doing  that  sort  of  thing  all  the  time  and  they  have  an  excel- 
lent machinery  for  that  purpose.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  where  the  special 
knowledge  which  they  do  not  possess  is  required  is  in  the  oral  examination  to 
determine  the  question  of  general  personal  fitness  for  the  foreign  service. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  All  questions  for  the  written  examination  are  prepared  by 
the  Civil  Service  Commission? 

Mr.  CARR.  Prepared  by  the  Civil  Service  Commission,  revised  by  the  board 
appointed  by  the  President,  and  then  printed  by  the  Civil  Service  Commission, 
and  the  written  examination  actually  conducted  by  the  officers  of  the  commis- 
sion, the  chief  examiner,  or  a  member  of  the  commissino,  being  also  a  member 
of  the  board  appointed  by  the  President  to  conduct  examinations  for  entrance 
into  the  foreign  service,  so  it  gives  us  the  use  of  the  commission's  machinery 
instead  of  requiring  the  setting  up  of  independent  machinery  with  increased 
expense  for  this  purpose.  It  gives  the  board  appointed  by  the  President  com- 
plete control  of  the  examination  for  the  foreign  service  and  entire  control  of 
the  personal  part  of  the  examination  where  the  special  knowledge  is  required. 

Mr.  LINTHICUII.  How  does  it  affect  men  already  in  the  service? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  bill  leaves  men  already  in  the  service  exactly  where  they  are, 
except  that  where  they  deserve  reclassification  at  the  higher  rates  of  compensa- 
tion as  provided  by  this  bill,  of  course  they  will  be  so  classified,  provided  their 
service  records  for  efficiency  warrant  it;  if  their  service  records  do  not  war- 
rant classification  as  high  as  provided  by  this  bill,  the  bill  authorizes  the 
President  to  make  such  other  reclassification  as  he  may  see  fit.  That  is  in 
section  6.  That  section  says  that  before  the  date  on  which  this  act  goes  into 
effect  the  Secretary  of  State  shall  recommend  to  the  President  the  names  of 
those  secretaries  in  the  Diplomatic  Service,  consuls  general,  consuls,  and  vice  con- 
suls, who  for  reasons  of  demonstrated  efficiency  are  entitled  to  be  reconimis- 
sioned  as  foreign  service  officers  of  the  respective  classes  specified  in  this  act, 
and  the  names  of  those  officers  who,  through  failure  to  demonstrate  or  maintain 
the  requisite  degree  of  efficiency,  should  be  recommissioned  to  classes  lower 
than  those  specified  or  otherwise  treated  as  exceptions  within  the  discretion  of 
the  President. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Mr.  Rogers,  will  you  take  the  chair?  I  have  a  hearing  before 
the  Flood  Control  Committee  which  I  must  attend. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  In  reference  to  these  examinations,  how  are  the  appoint- 
ments to  be  made,  in  the  same  way  that  the  Civil  Service  Commission  recom 
mends  the  appointment  of  the  three  highest,  and  selections  from  that,  or  how 
are  they  made? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  should  say  that  that  would  depend  upon  the  regulations  issued 
by  the  President.  This  bill,  as  I  see  it,  does  not  purport  to  lay  down  specific 
directions  as  to  exactly  the  order  in  which  appointments  should  be  made.  I 
can  tell  you  what  is  done  now,  and  that  may  be  fairly  taken  to  indicate  the 
probable  practice  under  this  bill.  After  the  examination,  after  the  ratings  are 
agreed  upon,  the  names  are  put  on  the  eligible  list  in  the  order  of  the  ratings. 
That  is,  the  names  of  the  men  with  the  highest  ratings  head  the  list.  In  draw- 
ing men  for  appointment  we  draw  the  highest  man  first,  and  so  on  down, 


44  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF  THE   UNITED  STATES. 

making  the  choice  dependent  entirely  upon  the  standing  of  the  men  on  the.  list, 
the  standing  which  they  have  attained  in  the  examination.  If,  for  example, 
there  should  be  two  men  with  the  same  standing,  the  same  rating,  we  would 
take  first  the  man  from  the  State  that  had  the  least  representation. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  Are  you  not  required  to  give  the  States  pro  rata  repre- 
sentation ? 

Mr.  GARB.  We  are  required  to  give  the  States  pro  rata  representation  as 
between  men  of  equal  merit.  Equal  merit  means  men  who  have  passed  the 
examination  with  the  same  rating.  If  they  have,  then  the  State  that  has  the 
least  representation  gets  the  first  appointment  as  between  those  two  men. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  There  is  no  requirement  under  this  bill  to  follow  the  lines 
that  you  have  followed  in  selecting  men  with  the  highest  average,  is  there? 

Mr.  CARR.  Not  in  this  bill,  but  it  is  directly  implied  by  section  6,  which  lays 
down  •  the  principle  there  that  the  classification  and  promotions  shall  be  for 
efficiency.  When  you  lay  down  that  principle,  then  you  at  once  have  to  con- 
sider the  question  of  relative  efficiency,  of  which  of  two  men  is  the  more 
efficient.  Then  you  are  bound  to  take  the  men  with  the  highest  ratings.  You 
can  not  logically  apply  the  act  in  any  other  way. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  I  do  not  see  how  you  are  bound,  if  you  remember  that  the 
administration  laid  down  a  principle  that  first-class?  postmas  ers  should  be 
examined  and  that  they  were  going  to  appoint  them  on  merit  or  efficiency. 
The  postmaster  in  Baltimore  got  the  highest  average  in  efficiency  and  every- 
thing else  and  yet  the  lowest  man,  though  a  very  good  man,  was  appointed, 
for  political  reasons.  Would  not  that  same  thing  apply  under  this  bill? 

Mr.  CARR.  AH  I  can  say  as  to  that  is  that  we  have  the  accumulated  practice 
now  of  something  like  16  years  in  the  consular  service  and  13  years  in  the 
diplomatic  service.  The  course  of  our  procedure  under  the  rules  laid  down 
first  by  a  Republican  President,  carried  on  by  another  Republican  President. 
and  carried  on  through  two  administrations  without  change  by  a  Democratic 
President,  and  now  again  carried  on  by  another  Republican  President,  has  been 
consistently  upward,  more  perfect  each  year,  more  nearly  toward  an  absolute 
rule  of  taking  first  the  highest  man  without  exception,  and  so  going  down  the 
list  as  they  do  with  the  ordinary  clerical  force  in  the  civil  service.  In  respect 
to  the  consular  service,  our  policy  reached  its  highest  degree  of  consistency  in 
the  second  half  of  the  last  administration,  when  it  became  an  invariable  rule 
that  the  men  should  be  taken  off  the  eligible  list  in  the  order  of  their  standing. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  I  recognize  that  you  have  been  following  that  out;  but  it 
looked  to  me  as  if  this  section  6  might  reorganize  and  uproot  the  whole  pro- 
cedure, because  any  man  can  be  classed  there  as  not  efficient  and  thrown  out 
entirely ;  and  my  point  is  whether  you  can  not  under  that  section  6  upset  the 
whole  present  system. 

Mr.  CARR.  No.  You  can  not  upset  the  whole  present  system.  You  gentlemen 
in  the  House  and  Senate  would  not  permit  the  whole  present  system  to  be 
upset. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  We  do  not  always  have  the  say  after  the  laws  go  through 
Congress. 

Mr.  CARR.  There  is  this  to  be  said,  that  every  appointment  under  this  bill 
would  be  subject  to  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate.  That  is  provided 
for  in  the  bill.  Therefore,  at  least  one  branch  of  Congress  would  pass  upon 
every  one  of  the  appointments  to  be  made  under  this  bill. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  I  know  that  Chief  Justice  Taft  suggests  that  a  great  many 
minor  appointments  in  the  Government  should  be  made  by  the  Civil  Service 
Commission. 

Mr.  CARR.  Of  course,  I  have  not  anything  to  do  with  that. 

Mr.   LINTHICUM.  This  might  follow  in  the  same  line  after  a   while. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  am  interested  only  in  the  improvement  of  the  foreign  service: 
and,  so  far  as  the  domestic  service  is  concerned,  that  is  somebody  else's  re- 
sponsibility. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  I  recognize  that  you  are  deeply  interested  in  this,  and  that 
is  one  reason  I  do  not  want  you  to  do  anything  which  might  upset  that. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  would  not  come  here  and  appear  before  this  committee  advo- 
cating any  measure  that  I  thought  would  be  reactionary  and  would  give  us 
something  less  satisfactory  than  that  which  we  already  have.  What  I  want  is 
improvement,  and  not  to  destroy  that  which  we  already  have. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  I  understand  that  the  questions  referred  to  the  discretion  given 
to  the  President  in  the  phrase  in  section  5.  "  under  such  rules  and  regulations 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF  THE  UNITED  STATES.  45 

as  the  President  may  prescribe,"  authorized  in  section  5  under  the  rearrange- 
ment and  reclassification  made  by  the  President. 

Does  that  give  the  President  any  more  discretion  than  he  has  under  exist- 
ing law? 

Mr.  GARB.  No.  The  President  has  discretion  under  existing  law  to  make  any 
appointment  he  pleases  and  to  make  any  exception  to  the  regulations  he  has 
laid  down  to  limit  his  own  appointments  that  he  chooses  to  make. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  So  there  would  be  no  more  danger  of  upsetting  the  present 
system  if  this  should  pass  than  if  nothing  should  pass? 

Mr.  CARE.  No.  It  was  thought  possible  that  Congress  itself  might  think  it 
was  desirable  that  it  express  itself  in  favor  of  the  President  exercising  some 
discretion  in  case  there  should  be  men  in  the  service,  for  example,  who  should 
not  be  put  permanently  in  the  service. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  Under  the  present  system  you  have  been  advancing  and 
things  have  been  going  on  satisfactorily,  but  when  you  come  to  reorganization 
of  the  whole  thing,  the  question  is  whether  that  does  not  open  the  doors  to 
the  elimination  of  certain  men  and  placing  other  men  in. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  The  door  is  open  now. 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  Reorganization  would  open  the  doors  wide  to  making 
changes,  whatever  changes  you  might  think  it  proper  to  make. 

Mr.  CARR.  There  is  no  one  who  has  any  thought  of  a  reorganization  which 
shall  permit  to  enter  into  it  any  political  or  personal  or  social  or  other  kind 
of  preferential  treatment  of  the  men. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  How  can  you  answer  for  that,  for  the  thoughts  and  notions 
that  will  come  into  the  heads  of  people  on  a  measure  like  this? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  can  only  answer  in  response  that  I  have  conferred  with  people 
who  would  have  to  do  with  putting  this  bill  into  operation,  including  the 
Secretary  of  State,  and  I  know  there  has  never  come  up  a  thought  or  a  sus- 
picion that  they  should  want  to  do  anything  except  make  the  best  possible 
use  under  this  bill  of  the  human  material  they  have,  and  offer  opportunity 
for  better  material  to  come  forward  hereafter  to  enter  this  foreign  service. 

Mr.  COLE.  You  spoke  about  apportionment  among  the  States.  How  do  you 
do  that? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  rules  under  which  men  are  now  admitted  to  examination  and 
appointed  after  examination  to  both  branches  of  the  service  provide  that  where 
the  merits  of  the  men  are  equal  the  appointment,  as  between  two  men.  should 
go  to  the  State  that  has  the  least  representation. 

Mr.  COLE.  Representation  according  to  population,  or  what? 

Mr.  CARR.  According  to  population.  Where,  for  instance,  you  have  two 
men  who  receive  a  rating  of  82,  the  man  who  comes  from  the  State  that  has 
the  least  representation  in  the  Consular  or  Diplomatic  Service,  according  to 
population,  would  get  the  first  appointment. 

Mr.  CONN  ALLY.  The  objection  that  Mr.  Liuthicum  pointed  out  is  one  of 
the  most  striking  merits  the  bill  has,  in  my  view.  I  want  to  ask  about  one 
clause  here  in  section  6,  to  certify  the  officer  "  who  through  failure  to  dem- 
onstrate or  maintain  the  requisite  degree  of  efficiency,  should  be  recommis- 
sioned  to  classes  lower  than  those  specified  or  otherwise  treated  as  exceptions 
within  the  discretion  of  the  President."  Do  you  mean  by  that  to  eliminate 
them,  if  necessary? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  should  imagine  that  that  would  be  the  sort  of  thing  which 
congress  would  want  done.  If  there  should  be  any  men  in  the  service  who" 
were  inefficient  and  had  not  maintained  the  proper  standard,  I  think  that 
probably  Congress  would  not  want  automatically  to  legislate  those  men  into 
permanent  positions  to  be  retired  on  pay  at  the  end  of  their  35  years'  service. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  The  President  has  power  to  eliminate  anybody  he  wants  to 
at  the  present  time.  That  is  the  law  already. 

Mr.  CARR.  The  President  has  complete  power  over  the  diplomatic  and  con- 
sular officers. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  Neither  this  law  nor  any  law  of  Congress  can  bind  him. 
Mr.  COCKRAN.  Mr.  Linthicum  says  that  no  law  can  bind  him.     Is  that  your 
understanding? 

Mr.  CARR.  It  is  my  understanding  that  the  Constitution  gives  the  President 
the  sole  right  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate  to  appoint 
all  ambassadors,  public  ministers  and  consuls,  and  that  no  law  passed  by  the 
two  houses  of  Congress  can  limit  the  power  of  the  President  in  that  respect. 


46  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  Then  he  has  the  power  to  eliminate  any  man  he  thinks 
inefficient  and  may  do  it. 

Mr.  CABB.  He  has  the  power  to  do  it  and  he  does  do  it. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  Certainly. 

Mr.  CAKB.  The  difference  between  the  power  under  this  provision  and  the 
power  which  he  already  possesses  is  that  this  bill  relates  to  a  new  class  of 
officers  which  is  sought  to  be  established,  the  foreign  service  officer,  so-called, 
who  shall  have  a  commission  and  whose  appointment  and  entry  into  the  ser- 
sive,  and  promotion,  can  be  regulated  by  an  act  of  Congress,  so  that  a  pro- 
vision like  this  is  desirable.  Congress  would  have  the  discretion,  and  the 
power  to  legislate  in  regard  to  such  officers  of  the  Government.  The  Consti- 
tution provides  for  that.  There  their  right  is  supreme.  But  with  reference 
to  consuls,  diplomatic  secretaries,  or  ministers  you  have  not  the  right  under 
the  Constitution  to  tie  the  President's  hands.  This  bill  is  devoted,  first  of 
all,  to  foreign  service  officers,  a  grade  of  officers  duly  classified  with  grad- 
uated salaries  who  can  be  also  commissioned  consular  officers  or  diplomatic 
officers.  Why?  Because  by  creating  that  body  of  officers  and  appropriating 
salaries  for  them  rather  than  for  diplomatic  and  consular  officers  you  obtain 
a  unified  and  flexible  foreign  service.  You  can  regulate  the  promotions,  regu- 
late the  entry  into  the  service,  regulate  the  salary  scale.  Now,  if  the  President 
should  select  men  from  that  group  of  foreign  service  officers  for  appointment 
as  consul,  or  for  appointment  as  secretary,  as  he  unquestionably  will  do,  if 
you  give  him  the  power  to  do  it,  then  you  will  have  men  who  can  pursue  their 
profession  of  foreign  service  officers  in  either  branch  of  the  service  or  both 
branches  of  the  service.  If  in  one  branch,  the  Consular  Service,  a  man  should 
develop  special  political  discernment  or  other  ability  peculiarly  useful  in  the 
Diplomatic  Service,  he  could  be  changed  over  into  that  service  without  diffi- 
culty, because  the  same  salary  scale  would  apply  to  each  service.  The  men 
in  both  branches  would  be  foreign  service  officers.  They  would  be  the  same 
some  sort  of  officers  basically  and  classified  alike.  By-and-by  when  the  officer 
who  has  been  transferred  into  the  Diplomatic  Service  and  there  develops  such 
qualities  as  might  make  it  in  the  interest  of  the  Government  to  send  him  to 
some  semidiplomatic  post  like  Ottawa,  Calcutta,  Capetown  or  elsewhere 
where  there  are  consular  and  diplomatic  duties  to  be  performed,  the  President 
might  retransfer  him  to  the  consular  branch  of  the  service  again  to  serve 
there  for  a  time.  Suppose  we  take  another  man  of  outstanding  ability,  who 
would  enter  the  service  under  this  new  arrangement.  He  would  come  in  as  a 
foreign  service  officer.  He  would  select,  let  us  say,  the  Consular  Service  as 
his  regular  career. 

I  have  such  a  man  as  that  in  mind  at  the  moment,  who  selected  the  consular 
service  and  developed  later  on  diplomatic  qualities  of  a  very  high  character. 
You  can  not  always  tell  what  a  man  in  the  service  is  going  to  develop  into.  Let 
us  say  this  man  should  develop  diplomatic  ability  of  a  high  order  while  in  the 
Consular  Service.  There  exists  a  place  in  the  Diplomatic  Service  where  he  can 
be  utilized  with  great  advantage  to  the  Government.  Under  this  bill  he  can 
be  put  into  that  place.  Suppose  later  a  need  for  that  particular  kind  of  a  man 
should  develop  in  a  post  like  Calcutta,  Ottawa,  Capetown,  or  Melbourne,  where 
you  have  consular  and  diplomatic  duties  to  be  performed — and  there  are  a  con- 
siderable number  of  such  posts.  It  is  perfectly  easy  under  this  bill  to  transfer 
the  man  over  to  the  consular  side  of  the  service  again.  It  would  not  destroy 
the  morale  of  the  consular  branch  of  the  service  any  more  than  it  did  not 
destroy  the  morale  of  the  diplomatic  branch  when  the  man  was  originally  taken 
over  from  the  Consular  Service,  because  from  the  point  of  view  of  salary  and 
classification  and  promotion  he  has  been  a  foreign  service  officer  all  the  time. 
There  is  no  room  for  jealousy  in  a  service  so  adjusted. 

Mr.  CONNALLY.  Suppose  he  is  transferred  over  to  the  Diplomatic  Service,  there 
may  be  a  new  President  who  wants  some  one  else.  Would  he  automatically 
revert  to  the  consular  branch? 

Mr.  CARS.  The  President  would  transfer  him  over  by  and  with  the  advice 
and  consent  of  the  Senate,  unless  he  already  had  a  commission  in  the  Consular 
Service,  when  he  could  do  it  without  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate. 

Mr.  COXNALT.Y.  How  is  that? 

Mr.  TARE.  The  President  would  make  such  disposition  of  this  man  as  he  saw 
fit  always.  If  the  man  had  come  from  the  Consular  Service  in  the  first  place, 
had  a  consular  commission  given  him  with  the  consent  of  the  Senate,  he  would 
be  appointed  in  the  Diplomatic  Service  in  the  same  manner,  by  and  with  the 
advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate,  of  course.  In  respect  to  officers  of  both 
branches  of  the  foreign  service,  which  this  bill  would  provide  for,  a  President 


FOREIGN   SEBVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  47 

who  should  cease  to  require  a  particular  man's  services  in  the  Diplomatic  Service 
could  reassign  him  back. 

Mr.  O'ONNALLY.  He  could  do  it.  If  he  did  not  do  anything,  would  he  auto- 
matically go  back  into  that  corps? 

Mr.  CAER.  Only  by  express  direction  of  the  President. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  How  does  that  change  the  existing  situation?  The  President 
can  do  that  now. 

Mr.  CARR.  It  changes  the  existing  system  in  this  way.  We  have  two  separate 
and  distinct  corps  of  officers,  the  Consular  Service  with  its  own  salary  classifica- 
tion, and  we  have  the  diplomatic  service  with  an  entirely  different  salary  clas- 
sification. You  can  not  take  a  man  from  the  Consular  Service  and  use  him  in 
the  Diplomatic  Service  without  demoting  him  unduly,  and  you  can  not  take  a 
man  from  the  Diplomatic  Service  and  use  him  in  the  Consular  Service  without 
unduly  promoting  him. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  You  could  actually  change  him  from  one  branch  to  the  other 
if  you  wished  to. 

Mr.  CARR.  We  could  do  so  now,  but  suppose  you  should  take  a  counselor  of 
embassy  and  want  to  use  him  at  Calcutta.  He  gets  $4,000.  The  consul  general 
at  Calcutta  gets  §8,000. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  As  far  as  the  salaries  are  concerned.  That  is  the  purpose  of 
the  bill — to  equalize  salaries.  So  far  as  transfer  is  concerned,  the  President 
can  do  everything  now  which  the  bill  authorizes  him  to  do. 

Mr.  CARR.  He  can  do  everything — can  appoint  a  man  in  either  branch  of  the 
service. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  And  remove  him  at  his  discretion? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  In  what  way  does  this  make  a  change,  except  so  far  as  the 
equalization  of  salaries,  in  the  existing  system? 

Mr.  CARR.  Equalization  of  salaries  and  by  providing  the  corps  of  foreign- 
service  officers,  which  would  carry  salaries  for  men  assigned  to  either  the  dip- 
lomatic or  consular  branch  of  the  service;  it  would  break  down  the  wall  now 
existing  between  the  two  separate  services.  You  would  bring  about  a  com- 
munity of  interest  in  the  two  branches  of  the  foreign  service.  You  would  im- 
prove the  morale  of  the  entire  service  of  both  branches,  I  think,  enormously 
by  establishing  this  corps  of  officers.  That  Congress  has  the  right  to  do ;  it 
is  entirely  within  its  power  to  do  so,  and  it  would  improve  this  whole  service 
more  than  I  can  describe  to  you. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  It  in  no  way  invades  the  limits  or  undertakes  to  limit  the 
power  of  the  President  to  dispose  of  these  officers  as  he  thinks  best? 

Mr.  CAHR.  In  no  sense  whatever. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Does  it  give  the  President  the  power  to  circumscribe  or  exer- 
cise the  discretion  of  his  successors? 

Mr.  CARR.  No.  I  will  put  it  this  way :  Congress  has  always  reserved  to  itself 
the  right  to  provide  the  money  for  carrying  on  foreign  relations.  It  has  re- 
served to  itself  the  right  to  refuse  to  appropriate  the  salary  of  a  minister  or 
secretary  or  consul  throughout  the  history  of  the  country.  This  bill  does  not 
attempt  to  cause  any  relinquishment  of  that  right  but  to  exercise  that  right  in 
creating  the  foreign-service  officer  class  and  attaching  salaries  to  that  class 
instead  of  using  its  power  to  attach  the  salary  to  the  individual  consul  or 
consul  general  or  diplomatic  secretary.  If  you  should  pass  this  bill  this  after- 
noon, the  President  to-morrow  morning,  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Senate,  could  appoint  as  many  ambassadors  and  ministers  and  consuls  and 
secretaries  as  he  pleased  outside  of  this  class  of  foreign-service  officers,  and  you 
would  or  would  not  provide  for  their  compensation  as  you  might  think  best. 
In  other  words,  you  have  not  taken  from  the  President  any  power  that  he  has 
now.  You  have  not  taken  from  Congress  any  power  that  it  has  now.  You 
have  not  adopted  any  new  principle,  except  that  you  have  provided  that  the 
compensation  of  men  in  both  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Services  shall  be  ob- 
tained from  the  salaries  you  provide  for  foreign-service  officers  instead  of 
providing  two  entirely  separate  salary  scales. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  There  would  not  be  anything  under  this  law.  as  I  understand 
it,  where  a  man  who  was  to-day  counselor  at  Paris  might  be  transferred  to 
consul  general  at  London  under  this  bill.  That  is  the  purpose  of  the  bill. 

Mr.  CARR.  At  the  present  time  it  could  be  done. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  could  occur  at  the  present  time? 

Mr.  CARR.  That  could  be  done  at  the  present  time. 


48  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE  UNITED  STATES. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Then  this  bill  does  not  in  any  way  change  the  power  of  the 
President? 

Mr.  CABB.  It  does  not  change  that. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  He  would  have  to  be  confirmed? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Under  this  bill  would  a  confirmation  also  be  required? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  consul  general,  you  say,  at  Paris  or  London? 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  The  counselor  at  Paris. 

Mr.  CABB,  To  be  transferred  as  consul  general  at  London.  No;  he  would 
not  have  to  he  confirmed  bv  the  Sonate.  because  the  law.  as  it  stands  now  on 
the  statute  books,  gives  the  President  the  right  to  transfer  any  consular 
officer  or  any  secretary  In  the  Diplomatic  Service  from  post  to  post  in  the 
cln-«  t"  "'h  f-h  '-P  s  nnn  'intP'l. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  Mr.  Cockran's  question  was  as  to  the  counselor  of  embassy  at 
Paris — to  be  transferred. 

Mr.  CABR.  I  beg  your  pardon.  At  the  present  time  the  counselor  of  embassy 
in  Paris  could  be  transferred  as  consul  general  at  London,  or  the  reverse, 
only  by  a  new  appointment  and  confirmation  by  the  Senate.  The  practical 
difficulty  there  lies  in  this:  The  counselor  of  embassy  receives  $4,000;  the 
consul  general  receives  $12,000.  What  we  are  anxious  to  have  is  a  system 
devised  by  which  the  consul  general  at  London  might  conceivably  be  sent 
over  to  Paris  as  counselor  of  embassy  there,  or  the  counselor  of  embassy  in 
Paris  niisrht  conceivably  be  sent  over  to  London  as  consul  general  there.  That 
could  only  be  done  by  standardizing  the  salaries  here  as  provided  by  this  bill. 

Mi*.  COCKRAN.  There  is  one  other  question  I  would  like  some  light  on.  That 
is  about  the  discharge  of  men  employed  under  this  system.  The  President 
under  your  regulations  now  has  the  absohite  right  to  discharge? 

Mr.  CABR.  Absolute. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Under  the  regulations,  would  he  have  the  right  here  under 
this  bill? 

Mr.  CABB.  I  beg  your  pardon? 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Does  the  President  have  the  right  to  remove  a  man  after  hear- 
ing him,  or  can  he  be  removed  by  the  stroke  of  a  pen? 

Mr.  CARR.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  there  is  no  specific  regulation  as  to  how  a  man 
should  be  removed.  In  practice  every  man  practically  receives  a  hearing — that  Is, 
has  opportunity  to  present  any  facts  that  he  might  want  to  present  in  advance, 
unless,  indeed,  there  should  be  a  plain  case,  such  as  a  case  of  drunkenness, 
where  the  knowledge  is  so  complete  on  the  part  of  the  adnrnistrative  officer 
as  to  admit  of  no  defense  whatever.  Generally  speak:ng,  you  might  say.  the 
principles  of  good  business  management  and  of  the  Federal  civil  service  law 
are  quite  carefully  observed.  No  one  has  any  right  to  complain,  in  my  experi- 
ence, of  the  manner  in  which  he  has  been  removed  from  the  service,  and  per- 
haps there  has  been  even  more  len'ency  than  should  be. 

Mr.  LINTHICTJM.  In  the  event  of  the  passage  of  this  bill,  you  would  no  longer 
consider  the  Diplomatic  or  Consular  Service,  but  consider  it  as  the  foreign 
service. 

Mr.  CARR.  Consider  it  as  a  foreign  service  so  far  as  the  salaries  are  concerned. 
Consider  it  as  the  foreign  service  so  far  as  the  morale  is  concerned.  Consider 
it  as  foreign  service  from  the  domestic  point  of  view,  with  respect  to  compensa- 
tion and  management.  Now,  when  you  step  outside  of  the  United  States  the 
condition  is  entirely  different.  There,  in  order  to  be  of  any  value,  a  man  must 
take  on  the  status  of  either  diplomatic  officer  or  of  constilar  officer,  because 
they  are  the  types  of  officers  recosrnized  in  international  law  and  by  the  usage 
of  nations.  You  can  not  change  that  condition  by  anything  you  may  enact  here 
in  Congress.  For  example,  let  us  say.  a  man  goes  as  a  diplomatic  secretary 
to  London.  His  name  goes  on  the  diplomatic  list :  he  gets  his  immunities  and 
his  powers  and  his  functions  because  he  is  a  diplomatic  secretary,  not  because 
he  is  a  foreign  service  officer. 

Mr.  LTNTHICUM.  And  his  invitations. 

Mr.  GARB.  And  his  invitations.  The  consul  general  in  London  takes  his  status 
there  as  a  consular  officer,  not  as  a  foreign  service  officer,  because  a  foreign 
service  officer  is  not  known  in  international  law  or  to  international  intercourse. 

Mr.  CONNALLY.  Is  not  that  true,  also,  that  all  of  our  other  laws  and  customs 
and  usages  here  in  this  respect  are  that  way? 

Mr.  CARR.  Certainly. 

Mr.  CONNALLY.  In  view  of  that,  would  it  be  wise  to  change  the  designation? 
Could  you  not  frame  up  some  kind  of  name  for  this  corps  that  would  continue 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED  STATES.  49 

this  idea  of  consular  and  diplomatic  services  so  as  not  to  come  in  conflict  with 
all  our  laws  and  usages? 

Mr.  CAEK.  This  does  not  come  into  conflict  with  any  law  or  usage.  This  sim- 
ply states,  in  section  4,  that  any  foreign  service  officer  appointed  as  such  and 
drawing  his  salary  under  this  unified  salary  scale  shall,  when  he  exercises 
functions,  exercise  them  under  his  commission  as  a  diplomatic  secretary  or 
diplomatic  officer  or  under  his  commission  as  a  consular  officer.  So  there  is 
no  change  there  whatsoever,  and  further  on  in  the  bill  is  a  provision  also  which 
adapts  this  bill  to  the  existing  statutory  law  that  you  have  in  regard  to  diplo- 
matic and  consular  officers. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  I  think  Mr.  Cockran  brought  up  the  question  last  time  under 
a  similar  bill,  that  a  man  might  be  a  consular  officer  in  a  certain  place  and 
be  transferred  to  another  place,  and  he  raised  the  question  whether  the  Senate 
ought  to  have  something  to  say  whether  a  man  should  be  designated  to  any 
particular  place  or  not. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  is  as  to  those  ministers  who  represent  us  at  certain  places, 
ministers  and  ambassadors. 

Mr.  LiNTHictiM.  But  this  would  provide  that  a  consul  could  be  transferred 
to  a  diplomatic  post. 

M.  f'ocKiiAN.  But  not  to  be  a  minister.  He  could  not  be  transferred  to  be  a 
minister  under  this  law. 

Mr.  CARR.  This  bill  does  not  relate  to  the  office  of  minister. 
Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  is  what  I  understand. 

Mr.  LiNTHict'M.  This  bill  would  not  affect  the  situation  that  he  mentioned 
then. 

Mr.  CAKI;.  No.    There  is  only  one  place  in  this  bill  that  relates  to  the  office 
of  minister,  and  that  is  where  it  authorizes  the  President  to  take  a  foreign 
service  officer  and  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate  make 
him  a  diplomatic  agent,  charges  d'affaires,  or  minister  resident  without  affect- 
ing his  salary  status  as  a  foreign  service  officer. 
Mr.  COCKRAN.  Take  him  out  for  a  special  service? 
Mr.  GARB.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  But  that  would  require  the  consent  of  the  Senate,  of  course. 
Mr.  ROGERS.  In  an  effort  to  sum  up  what  you  have  been  saying  in  response  to 
questions  is  this  true,  that  this  bill  does  not  and  can  not  limit  the  appointive 
powers  of  the  President,  or  the  scope  of  his  powers,  with  respect  to  assigning 
consuls  and  secretaries? 
Mr.  CARR.  No. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  All  that  may  be  done  under  the  Constitution  and  under  exist- 
ing laws,  and  all  that  this  bill  purports  to  do,  as  I  understand  it,  is  to  modify 
the  practice  in  that  regard  rather  than  the  right  in  that  regard.  In  other 
words,  whatever  the  Executive  power  has  been,  there  has  not  in  fact  and  in 
practice  been  in  the  past  such  an  interchangeability  between  the  two  sides 
of  the  foreign  service  as  students  of  the  subject  believe  would  be  beneficial  to 
the  service  and  to  the  country.  And  the  expectation  is  that  this  bill,  if  enacted, 
would  give  that  interchangeability  in  practice  which  is  theoretically  possible 
already. 

Mr.  CABR.  It  would  give  that  interchangeability  in  practice  which  is  actually 
possible  already  but  is  difficult  to  exercise  because  of  the  lack  of  any  uniform 
salary  applicable  to  both  services  and  the  authority  of  Congress  to  change 
a  man  back  and  forth  with  facility.  The  Executive  can  actually  take  a  man, 
subject  to  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate,  out  of  the  consular  or  diplo- 
matic service  and  put  him  into  either  service,  if  the  Senate  consents. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  In  what  position  would  this  bill  place  Japanese  and  Chinese 
interpreters? 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Ours  to  them  or  theirs  to  us? 
The  CHAIRMAN.  Ours  to  them. 

Mr.  CABB.  This  bill  does  not  cover  any  special  employment  of  that  sort.  If 
those  men  are  members  of  the  regular  Consular  Service  or  Diplomatic  Service, 
of  course,  they  would  retain  that  status.  If  they  were  outside  appointees,  they 
would  not  retain  that  exact  status.  What  I  mean  is  this:  Take  a  specific 
•instance,  we  have  now  in  China,  as  Chinese  secretary,  Mr.  Peck,  who  is  a 
member  of  the  Consular  Service.  He  is  a  member  of  a  certain  class  of  the 
Consular  Service.  He  would  be  automatically  incorporated  into  this,  of  course. 
He  would  be  detailed  to  Peking  for  that  purpose.  But  any  man  who  was 
not  a  member  of  the  regular  Consular  Service  would  take  such  a  position  as 
Congress  would  give  him  by  way  of  appropriation. 


50  FOREIGN  SERVICE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Could  Doctor  Peck  under  this  bill  be  transferred  into  the 
Diplomatic  Service,  or  Balentine  at  Tokio? 

Mr.  CABR.  He  could  become  a  foreign  service  officer  in  this  service,  but  he 
would  be  assigned  either  to  the  Consular  or  Diplomatic  Service,  wherever  he 
might  be  needed.  If  one  is  needed  at  Peking  or  Tokio,  that  is  presumably 
where  he  would  go. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  not  think,  in  view  of  the  importance  of  the  duties 
to  be  performed,  that  they  should  be  part  of  the  Diplomatic  Service? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  will  say  to  the  committee  that  these  two  interpreters 
practically  transact  all  of  the  business  before  those  Governments. 

Mr.  CARR.  They  are  not  citizens? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Yes. 

Mr.  CARR.  They  began  many  years  ago  as  student  interpreters  and  have 
risen  by  merit  to  their  present  positions. 

Mr.  COOPER.  They  are  white  men? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Mr.  Peck  was  born  in  China,  the  son  of  a  missionary.  I 
have  been  very  much  impressed  with  the  importance  of  the  duties  performed, 
and  I  would  like  to  see  them  in  the  Diplomatic  Service.  I  think  it  would  give 
them  more  prestige,  if  there  is  any  way  of  doing  it. 

Mr.  CARR.  This  bill  would  offer  a  better  career  than  even  now  to  men  who 
would  perfect  themselves  in  the  knowledge  of  those  countries  and  the  languages 
of  those  countries.  It  would  give  them  a  broader  career  than  they  have  now 
in  respect  to  compensation  and  opportunities. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  For  the  benefit  of  the  committee,  if  any  question  arises  with 
the  Chinese  or  Japanese  Governments,  the  matter  has  to  be  handled  by  the 
interpreter,  acting,  of  course,  for  the  ambassador  or  minister. 

Mr.  CARR.  That  is  perfectly  true,  and  any  man  who  goes  to  Peking  or  Tokyo 
as  ambassador  and  who  has  not  there  trustworthy  and  very  capable  agents, 
such  as  the  Chinese  or  Japanese  secretary,  would  find  his  usefulness  cut  50 
per  cent  at  least,  if  not  more.  They  are  the  most  necessary  members  of  the 
missions. 

Mr.  COOPER.  I  notice  in  section  14  that  the  bill  provides  that  any  minister 
could  be  sent  here  to  the  Department  of  State  for  three  years. 

Mr.  CARR.  The  law  now  is  that  any  consular  officer  or  any  diplomatic  officer 
below  the  grade  of  minister  may  be  assigned  in  the  Department  of  State. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Below  the  grade  of  minister? 

Mr.  CARR.  Below  the  grade  of  minister,  for  the  simple  reason  that  it  was  not 
thought  at  the  time  that  law  was  put  into  operation  that  it  would  be  necessary 
ever  to  have  a  minister  in  the  State  Department.  We  could  not  get  along  or 
run  the  State  Department  to-day  without  foreign  service  men  assigned  to  it, 
consular  and  diplomatic  officers.  Now,  the  assignment  of  a  minister  may  con- 
ceivably be  a  very  advantageous  thing  to  it  on  special  occasion.  I  remember 
when,  dur'ng  the  last  administration,  the  Secretary  of  State  sent  for  Mr. 
Fletcher,  then  at  Mexico  City,  owing  to  the  difficulty  they  were  having  down 
there,  and  had  Mr.  Fletcher  come  to  the  department.  He  spent  some  time  in 
helping  the  Secretary  with  the  Mexican  situation  A  similar  situation  may 
conceivably  arise  again,  and  this  language  is  merely  changed  in  that  regard 
to  the  extent  of  permitting  the  assignment  of  ministers  in  case  of  necessity. 

Mr.  COOPER.  When  we  would  bring  back  from  a  foreign  country  a  minister, 
would  not  that  sever  diplomatic  relations  with  that  country? 

Mr.  GARB.  No. 

Mr.  COOPER.  For  instance,  would  we  have  a  minister  to  one  of  the  continental 
European  countries  in  any  proper  sense  of  the  word,  and  have  him  here  in 
the  State  Department,  3,500  miles  from  the  scene  of  his  duties? 

Mr.  CARR.  In  the  same  way,  sir,  that  a  minister  may  take  a  leave  of  absence 
and  may  still  be  minister  to  Switzerland,  but  may  be  back  in  this  country 
temporarily. 

Mr.  COOPER.  That  does  not  meet  what  seems  to  me  to  be  the  objection  to  sec- 
tion 14.  He  could  be  brought  back  here  as  minister  and  have  that  title,  and,  I 
suppose,  the  emoluments  of  a  minister,  4.000  or  10,000  miles  from  the  country 
to  which  he  has  been  assigned  for  three  years  or  longer,  it  might  be  four  years. 

Mr.  CARR.  Under  the  section  as  drafted,  I  would  say  that  would  be  possible. 
I  do  not  mean  to  say  there  would  be  any  probability  of  it. 

Mr.  COOPER.  I  am  not  talking  about  probabilities.  It  would  expressly  provide 
that  a  man  could  be  brought  back  from  a  country,  no  matter  how  remote,  and 
kept  in  the  State  Department  as  minister  and  draw  the  salary  of  a  minister 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF  THE  UNITED  STATES.  51 

for  four  years,  three  years  and  an  extension  of  one  year.  Now,  is  that  the 
right  thing  to  do?  You  virtually  sever  diplomatic  relations.  We  have  no 
minister  in  that  country.  We  have  nobody  on  the  theater  of  operations.  Back 
here  in  the  State  Department  any  one  of  the  minor  officials  could  do  that  and 
not  be  called  minister  and  draw  the  salary  of  a  minister. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  have  not  any  special  interest  in  whether  you  authorize  bringing 
back  a  minister  on  assignment  to  the  State  Department  or  not.  I  do  not  claim 
to  be  especially  interested  in  that.  My  interest  extended  to  the  secretarial  class, 
to  the  consular  class.  There  I  think  that  is  highly  desirable. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Undoubtedly.     That  is  the  law  to-day. 

Mr.  CARR.  That  is  the  law  to-day.  It  is  to  be  changed  here  to  include  for- 
eign service  officers. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  Strike  out  "  minister  or,"  in  the  first  line  of  section  14,  and  say 
"  any  foreign  service  officer." 

Mr.  CARR.  Or  if  you  would  make  it  diplomatic  or  consular  officer,  which  I 
would  rather  see,  so  much  the  better.  If  you  prefer  foreign  service  officers,  I 
have  nothing  to  say  against  it. 

Mr.  COOPER.  You  make  a  distinction  here  between  officers  in  the  foreign  serv- 
ice and  foreign  service  officers?  Officers  in  the  foreign  service  would  include 
ambassadors  and  ministers,  but  foreign  service  officer  is  a  man  who  begins  at 
class  1  or  below. 

Mr.  CARR.  Below  the  grade  of  minister. 

Mr.  COOPER.  So  when  you  put  in  any  minister  or  foreign  service  officer  you 
add  something  that  has  never  been  in  the  law  before. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Strike  out  the  words  "  minister  or." 

Mr.  ACKKRMAN.  Would  that  section  14  permit  bringing  back  to  America  any 
officer  receiving  in  the  foreign  service  a  higher  salary  than  some  official  in  the 
State  Department,  to  the  confusion  of  the  other  officers  attached  to  the  depart- 
ment while  he  was  there  for.  possibly,  three  years? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes ;  that  is  true.  But  we  have  not  found  that  up  to  date  an  ob- 
jectionable thing. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Suppose,  Mr.  Carr,  that  we,  as  a  protest,  withdraw  our  minister 
from  a  country  without  breaking  relations.  The  legation  staff  will  cont'nue  in 
the  foreign  capital.  Under  the  present  law,  has  the  Department  of  State  the 
right  to  utilize  that  minister  in  the  department  for  a  period  exceeding  60  days? 

Mr.  CARR.  No.  It  has  not  the  r;ght  to  assign  him  to  the  department  on  any 
general  duty  nor  can  it  utilize  his  services  at  all  if  the  minister  should  happen 
not  to  have  reached  his  post.  Now,  we  had  the  case  of  Mr.  Fletcher,  of  which 
Mr.  Rogers  reminds  me  by  his  question.  He  had  been  transferred  from  Ch:le 
to  Mexico.  Developments  occurred  which  prevented  him  from  going  to  his 
post  in  Mexico  because  of  a  governmental  upheaval  there.  Yet  there  were 
circumstances  connected  with  our  relations  with  Mexico  which  made  it  nec- 
essary to  keep  him  at  hand  and  conduct  as  much  as  possible  of  the  work 
relating  to  Mexico  here  and  handle  as  many  as  possible  of  the  Mexican  ques- 
tions here  in  Washington,  until  he  could  actually  go  to  Irs  post.  That  con- 
sumed a  certain  length  of  time.  Under  the  present  law  the  ambassador  could 
not  get  any  salary  because  under  the  present  law  he  must  have  reached  his 
post  before  he  could  be  ordered  back  here  on  salary  even  for  consultation.  Do 
I  make  myself  clear  on  that? 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Yes. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Take  the  case  of  Mr.  Fletcher,  recalled  from  Mexico,  sta- 
tioned at  the  department,  practically  in  charge  of  Mexican  affairs.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  he  was  very  valuable  to  the  department  on  account  of  his  intimate 
knowledge  of  Mexican  conditions. 

Mr.  CARR.  He  would  not  have  been  there  for  any  other  reason.  He  was  there 
because  it  was  absolutely  necessary  to  the  Secretary  of  State  that  he  should 
be  there. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  It  was  highly  advisable  to  have  him  there. 

Mr.  CARR.  Absolutely  necessary. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Take  the  case  of  our  ambassador  to  Japan  during  Mi*.  Wil- 
son's administratoin.  He  was  sent  to  Vladivostock  on  a  special  mission  for  six 
months. 

Mr.  CARR.  All  the  way  to  Omsk  at  a  time  when  that  was  temporarily  the 
seat  of  the  Kolchak  Government.  He  was  sent  by  the  President  all  the  way 
across  Siberia,  to  Omsk,  to  make  a  personal  investigation  upon  which  to  deter- 
mine the  policy  of  this  Government. 


52  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED  STATES. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  In  the  average  case  where  we  would  draw  on  an  ambassador 
or  minister,  it  is  very  important  to  retain  him  in  the  State  Department  to  get 
the  benefit  of  his  experience  and  advice. 

Mr.  CARR.  There  are  occasions  when  it  is  highly  important  that  that  should 
be  done.  Of  course,  it  is  done  by  every  other  foreign  Government.  We  are 
probably  the  only  Government  that  does  not  do  that  on  occasion.  There  is  no 
provision  now  for  bringing  ambassadors  and  ministers  back  except  for  consul- 
tation in  connection  with  the  duties  of  his  paritcular  post  or  on  leave  of  absence. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  For  how  long  can  he  get  a  leave  of  absence? 

Mr.  CARR.  Sixty  days. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  is  the  limit?    After  that  the  man's  salary  ceases? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  CONNALLY.  Have  you  any  authority  now  to  regulate  this  under  section 
14?  Have  you  that  power  now? 

Mr.  CARR.  If  a  man  has  reached  his  post  of  duty  he  can  be  ordered  back  for 
consultation  with  reference  to  the  duties  of  that  post.  It  is  rarely  ever  done. 
If  he  has  not  reached  his  post,  if  he  is  being  transferred  between  one  post  and 
another  and  has  not  reached  his  new  post,  then,  however  badly  he  may  be 
needed  here,  his  salary  stops  if  he  should  be  ordered  here. 

Mr.  MOORE.  Can  you  read  into  the  record  the  provision  of  the  existing  law 
with  reference  to  the  matter  covered  by  section  14?  I  wish  to  find  out  exactly 
what  the  existing  law  is,  and  how  it  is  modified  by  section  14. 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes ;  I  shall  be  glad  to  put  it  in.  The  only  difference  in  this  section 
over  existing  law  is  that  the  words  "  foreign  service  officer "  are  included. 
That  is  because  the  foreign  service  officer,  so  far  as  salary  and  compensation  is 
concerned,  supersedes  the  secretaries  and  consuls. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Do  you  not  think  there  ought  to  be  a  provision  authorizing 
the  department  to  recall  either  an  ambassador  or  minister  for  consultation  as 
long  as  they  want  to? 

Mr.  CARR.  Of  course,  there  ought  to  be.  It  is  within  the  judgment  of  Con- 
gress whether  they  want  to  do  that.  I  think  that  the  foreign  service  ought  to 
be  as  elastic  under  the  direction  of  the  President  and  the  Secretary  of  State 
as  it  is  possible  to  make  it. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  As  in  the  case  of  Mexico,  and  as  with  Russia,  we  had  a 
minister  there  before  the  revolution  broke  out,  I  think  it  would  be  almost 
essential  to  the  State  Department  to  have  the  ri.^Ut  to  Vring  back  a  minister  or 
ambassador  and  keep  him  as  long  as  necessary- 
Mr.  COOPER.  To  keep  him  four  years. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  As  long  as  the  situation  existed. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Could  they  not  get  the  informaiton  from  men  who  had  been 
there  in  less  than  four  years? 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  But  they  could  not  get  information  on  various  phases  in  the 
light  of  his  experience. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Could  it  not  be  gotten  from  our  consular  officers?  If  we  have 
diplomatic  relations  we  also  have  consuls  there,  and  if  you  bring  the  consuls 
back  and  put  them  in  the  State  Department  could  you  not  get  the  information 
in  that  way?  Is  there  any  necessity  for  bringing  back  ambassadors  and  min- 
isters and  keeping  them  here  three  years  and  extending  it  one  year,  which 
would  be  the  complete  term  of  an  administration? 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  is  what  I  am  trying  to  ascertain.  Let  us  assume  the  case 
of  Russia.  Suppose  we  had  an  ambassador  in  Russia,  as  we  did  before  this 
revolution  broke  out  there.  If  recalled  from  there  he  would  know  things  about 
that  country  in  the  light  of  his  experience  there  that  could  not  be  obtained 
otherwise.  He  could  interpret  the  opposing  views.  It  would  be  a  very  extreme 
case,  but  it  would  be  in  extreme  times,  and  I  think  myself  that  such  a  power 
should  be  given  to  the  State  Department  to  acquaint  itself  with  any  agency  in 
dealing  with  complications  that  have  no  parallel  in  human  experience.  The 
case  that  Mr.  ('un  puts  there  illustrates  it  very  strikingly.  Mr.  Fletcher  had 
an  intimate  knowledge  of  Mexico  in  dealing  with  Mexican  affairs  up  to  date. 
I  am  sure  Mr.  Carr  will  bear  me  out.  He  must  in  the  nature  of  things  be  able 
to  give  information  to  the  State  Department. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  will  go  further.  I  will  assume  that  Mr.  Fletcher  was  sont  off  as 
soon  as  conditions  permitted. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Nobody  would  want  to  keep  him  unless  the  exceptional  circum- 
stances existed  that  can  not  be  anticipated,  such  as  in  the  case  of  Russia  or 
Poland.  You  might  take  the  case  of  Russia.  I  think  it  would  be  very  important 
to  give  the  State  Department  that  power,  and  I  think  it  ought  to  be  in  this  bill. 
That  feature,  in  my  judgment,  is  more  important  than  the  rest  of  it  put  together. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  53 

Mr.  CARK.  I  would  like  to  say  there  that  I  do  not  suppose  anybody  had  the 
thought  that  there  was  a  desire  to  get  any  minister  or  ambassador  back  here 
in  the  State  Department  on  assignment  for  three  or  four  years.  The  only 
reason  it  appears  in  that  text  is  that  that  is  the  language  in  existing  law  as 
applied  to  secretaries  and  consuls  and  consuls  general.  I  would  like  to  read 
that  now. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  This  is  the  law  that  you  were  asking  for,  Mr.  Moore. 

Mr.  CARR.  The  act  <>f  February  5,  1915,  section  2,  reads  as  follows : 

"  That  any  such  officer  ( secretary  in  the  Diplomatic  Service,  consul  general, 
or  consul)  may  be  designated  for  duty  in  the  Department  of  State  without  loss 
of  grade,  class,  or  salary,  such  assignment  to  be  for  a  period  of  not  more  than 
three  years,  unless  the  public  interests  demand  further  service,  when  such 
assignment  may  be  extended  for  a  period  not  to  exceed  one  year,  and  no  longer." 

That  is  the  present  law. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  The  effect  of  that  is  simply  that  if  the  department  needs  him 
there  it  could  assign  him  to  a  particular  duty  without  loss  of  salary  to  him. 

Mr.  CARR.  Exactly. 

Mr.  MOORE.  What  would  you  think  of  the  expediency  of  including  ambassa- 
dors and  ministers  with  the  others? 

Mr.  CAER.  I  think  it  desirable.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  the  Government  would 
stop  if  it  were  not  done,  but  I  think  it  desirable  to  give  the  President  and  the 
Secretary  of  State  as  much  discretion  there  as  possible.  We  can  not  look  ahead 
far  enough  to  see  the  exigencies  that  are  going  to  arise  in  the  next  few  years. 
I  have  been  dealing  with  these  matters  a  great  many  years ;  and  yet  my  imagina- 
tion was  not  vivid  enough  to  forecast,  in  1914,  for  example,  one  hundredth  of 
the  things  we  have  gone  through  in  foreign  relations  since  that  time  or  the 
exigencies  that  have  arisen.  None  of  us  can  look  forward  even  a  few  years 
and  predict  what  demands  may  be  upon  those  responsible  for  foreign  rela- 
tions. So  that  if  you  feel  inclined  to  do  so  and  feel  that  you  can  reasonably 
do  so,  I  should  say  that  it  would  be  a  power  very  desirable  to  place  in  the  hands 
of  the  President,  and  I  am  certain  that  it  would  not  be  abused. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  In  the  case  that  Mr.  Cooper  put,  of  failure  to  appoint  a  min- 
ister and  keep  him  at  his  post,  it  never  suspends  diplomatic  relations.  Italy 
did  not  appoint  an  ambassador  to  us  from  1892  to  1896.  after  the  riots  in  New 
Orleans,  after  Baron  Fava  left.  When  Keiley  was  rejected  as  minister  to 
Austria  and  the  Austrian  Government  refused  to  have  him,  a  new  minister  was 
appointed.  We  did  not  break  diplomatic  relations,  however.  It  is  a  method  of 
indicating  diplomatic  coolness. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  am  indebted  to  you  for  reminding  me  that  in  interonirse  between 
governments  the  temporary  withdrawal  of  a  head  of  mission  is  one  of  the 
expedients  resorted  to  to  indicate  displeasure  or  coolness  when  anything  may 
arise  on  which  agreement  can  not  be  reached. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Of  course  the  Government  would  not  keep  a  minister  away 
from  his  post  indefinitely,  but  in  such  a  case,  not  before  paralleled  in  human 
experience,  suppose  a  revolution  broke  out  in  Germany  result. ng  in  the  same 
condition  as  in  Russia,  I  should  think  that  it  would  be  the  wise  course  to  bring 
our  ambassador,  Mr.  Houghton,  back  home  to  interpret  the  events  in  the  light 
of  what  he  had  already  seen.  I  think  a  provision  of  that  kind  is  worth  more 
than  the  rest  of  the  bill  put  together. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Are  we  ready  to  proceed  with  the  next  topic? 

Mr.  CARR.  These  other  sections  are  for  the  most  part  merely  for  the  purpose 
of  adapting  the  present  system,  the  present  legislation,  to  the  corps  of  foreign- 
service  officers.  For  example,  take  section  10,  there  we  have  an  adaptation  to 
the  present  requirements  of  law  that  consular  officers  should  be  bonded,  and  ap- 
plying that  to  the  foreign-service  officers,  and  also  covering  under  that  diplo- 
matic secretaries,  who  are  now  not  bonded  but  in  nay  judgment  should  be,  inas- 
much as  they  handle  money  and  render  accounts  to  the  Government  and  collect 
fees. 

Mr.  COOPER.  WThat  is  the  particular  difference  between  this  as  proposed  and 
the  existing  law? 

Mr.  CARR.  There  is  no  difference  at  all,  except  that  it  applies  the  existing  law 
to  the  foreign-service  officers,  whereas  the  existing  law  is  applied  to  consuls 
and  consuls  general  only. 

Mr.  COOPER.  It  says  hereby  amended. 

Mr.  CARE.  Hereby  amended  to  that  extent. 

Mr.  COOPER.  In  substance,  the  same  thing. 


54  FOREIGN  SERVICE   OF   THE  UNITED  STATES. 

Mr.  CARR.  In  section  11  the  provision  of  the  present  inspection  law  that  re- 
quires the  inspection  of  consular  officers  is  applied  to  the  foreign-service  officers 
herein  provided  for  who  shall  be  assigned  to  the  duty  of  inspection.  That,  by 
the  way,  coupled  with  section  2  of  the  bill  as  I  should  like  to  see  it  amended, 
would  authorize  the  President  to  take  as  many  foreign-service  officers  as  Con- 
gress may  appropriate  for  above  class  4  of  foreign-service  officers. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  What  section? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  am  referring  now  to  section  1,  on  page  2  of  the  bill,  and  also  to 
section  11.  Section  2  of  the  bill,  I  would  suggest  an  amendment  by  striking 
out  the  words  in  parentheses,  lines  1  to  4,  which  authorizes  the  assignment  of 
officers  of  the  foreign  service,  officers  of  class  3,  to  the  duties  of  inspection, 
and  attach  a  proviso  that  would  read  something  like  this,  "  that  as  many  foreign- 
service  officers  above  class  5,  or  class  4,  let  us  say,  as  may  be  required  for  the 
purpose,  and  provided  annually  by  Congress  upon  recommendation  of  the  Sec- 
retary of  State,  may  be  designated  as  foreign-service  inspectors." 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Let  me  get  that  again.  At  the  top  of  page  2,  after  striking 
out  the  parentheses. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  After  striking  out  the  parentheses  in  lines  1  to  4. 

Mr.  COCKRAIS--.  Now,  I  get  you ;  yes.    What  is  the  amendment? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  would  add  a  proviso  to  the  effect  "  that  as  many  foreign-service 
officers  above  class  4  as  may  be  required  for  the  purpose  of  inspecting  and 
provided  for  annually  for  the  duties  of  inspection  by  Congress  upon  recom- 
mendation of  the  Secretary  of  State  may  be  designated  as  foreign-service 
inspectors." 

We  have  at  present  seven  inspectors  of  consulates  provided  for  by  Congress. 
There  is  no  inspection  of  the  diplomatic  branch  of  the  service.  There  should 
be  an  inspection  of  that  as  well  as  of  the  consular  branch  of  the  service.  By  the 
adoption  of  this  provision  in  this  bill  you  would  put  the  Secretary  of  State  in 
a  position  to  assign  such  a  number  of  officers  as  you  would  annually  appro- 
priate for  under  this  section  to  the  work  of  inspection,  the  work  similar  to 
that  now  done  in  inspecting  consulates,  and  also  extend  it  to  inspection  of 
diplomatic  offices.  I  think  you  will  agree  with  me  that  they  ought  to  have 
inspection  as  well  as  consular  offices.  I  think  that  is  sound  administration. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Is  there  any  inspection  now? 

Mr.  CARR.  No ;  there  is  no  provision  for  their  inspection. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  As  it  reads  after  striking  out  the  parentheses  the  Secretary 
would  be  limited  to  foreign-service  officers,  class  3. 

Mr.  CARR.  Exactly. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  You  propose  to  allow  him  to  make  appointments  to  the  foreign 
service  of  inspectors  of  class  1,  2,  3,  and  4, 

Mr.  CARR.  An  inspecting  officer  requires  a  very  special  kind  of  personality 
and  experience,  and  it  is  my  observation  that  there  ought  to  be  a  very  wide 
range  of  selection  in  the  service.  The  officers,  of  course,  are  all  taken  from  the 
service,  but  you  can  not  always  find  enough  men  in  one  class  who  are  espe- 
cially qualified  for  that  particular  duty,  which  after  all  is  a  very  difficult  duty 
and  requires  a  certain  special  kind  of  personality  and  a  certain  kind  of  expe- 
rience. So  it  would  be  in  the  interest  of  better  dniinistration.  I  am  sure,  if 
yon  should  broaden  the  range  of  selection  in  that  respect.  • 

Turning  again  to  section  11  on  page  7,  you  will  find  that  that  provides  "  that 
the  provisions  of  section  4,  act  of  April  5,  1906,  relative  to  consuls  general  at 
large  " — they  are  the  inspecting  officers  of  the  consular  service — "  are  hereby 
made  applicable  to  foreign-service  inspectors." 

I  would  suggest  there  an  amendment  in  line  4,  after  the  word  "  relative," 
insert  so  as  to  read  "  relative  to  the  powers,  duties,  and  prerogatives  of  the 
consuls  general  at  large,"  because  I  take  it  that  this ,  bill  does  not  mean  to 
continue  that  title  but  merely  to  transfer  the  powers  to  the  men  designated  as 
inspectors  under  this  act. 

Section  12,  page  7,  of  the  bill  applies  to  the  men  performing  the  diplomatic 
duties  the  same  provisions  of  law  that  now  exist  and  are  applicable  to  consular 
officers  in  respect  to  the  fees  collected  by  them  for  services.  In  other  words, 
it  puts  the  diplomatic  secretaries  on  a  straight  salary  basis,  as  was  long  ago 
done  in  the  case  of  consular  officers.  There  are  small  fees  for  notarial  work 
that  are  now  collected  and  retained  by  diplomatic  secretaries,  which  amount 
to  very  little,  but  this  change  would  lead  to  better  administration.  The  present 
law,  which  has  been  the  law  for  many  years,  confers  notarial  powers  on 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES.  55 

diplomatic  secretaries,  and  they  perform  a  certain  number,  though  not  many, 
services  of  that  kind,  and  they  may  retain  the  fees. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Is  there  any  accounting  to  Washington? 

Mr.  CARR.  As  far  as  I  know,  there  is  no  accounting. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  A  man  could  build  up  a  flourishing  business  if  he  were  so 
inclined. 

Mr.  CARR.  He  might  if  he  was  so  inclined,  but  I  have  never  seen  any  evi- 
dence of  an  inclination  in  that  direction. 

Mr.  LINTHHTM.  Have  you  considered  the  effect  this  would  have  upon  appro- 
priations for  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Services? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes,  sir;  the  first  year  it  would  increase  the  appropriation  about 
$378.000  and  the  second  year  about  $325,000. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  That  includes  both  salary  readjustments  and  retirements. 

Mr.  LiNTiiicuM.  I  am  not  complaining  about  the  increase,  because  I  have 
always  thought  that  the  appropriation  for  the  department  is  smaller  than  what 
you  ought  to  have.  We  have  been  too  parsimonious  with  the  State  Department. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  think  so.    I  think  the  country  has  suffered  from  it. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  Sections  8  and  10  of  the  act  of  April  5,  1906,  relate  to  the 
official  fees  of  consular  officers  and  the  methods  of  accounting  therefor.  That 
will  make  it  clearer  in  explaining  it  on  the  floor  of  the  House. 

Mr.  COLE.  Under  this  bill  there  will  be  no  fees  at  all  in  any  form  whatsoever. 

Mr.  CARR.  There  are  no  perquisites  in  the  way  of  fees  in  the  Consular 
Service. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Does  he  not  get  fees  for  taking  acknowledgments? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes ;  but  they  are  not  his ;  they  belong  to  the  Government  of  the 
United  States. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  If  you  go  in  and  verify  a  power  of  attorney  before  a  consul, 
does  the  fee  go  to  the  Government? 

Mr.  CARR.  He  has  to  account  for  it  under  his  bond. 

Mr.  COCKHAN.  I  thought  that  was  a  perquisite. 

Mr.  CARR.  There  are  no  perquisites  in  the  Consular  Sen-ice.  It  is  a  straight 
salary  proposition,  and  the  men  are  held  strictly  accountable  under  their 
bonds  for  every  cent  collected. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  There  are  a  few  consular  agents  who  do. 

Mr.  CARR.  There  are  less  than  100  of  them. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Consular  agents  are  not  really  officers  of  the  United  States, 
not  really  citizens,  generally  foreigners. 

Mr.  CARR.  Oftentimes  not  citizens,  because  it  is  not  always  possible  to  get  a 
citizen  to  take  such  a  position.  Their  compensation  is  derived  from  one-half 
of  the  fees  they  collect,  not  to  exceed  $1,000  in  one  year.  There  are  only  a 
few  and  we  hope  to  replace  them  as  time  goes  on  by  vice  consuls  of  career. 

Mr.  COOKRAN.  Just  one  moment  on  that  section  14,  which  I  think  the  most 
vital  of  the  bill.  I*  there  any  reason  for  specifying  the  time  during  which  a 
man  can  be  assigned?  Why  would  it  not  be  better  to  state  that  he  shall  be 
assigned  so  long  as  the  public  interest  required? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  would  prefer  that  that  time  be  limited. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Why? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  reason  why  is  that  while  there  has  not  been  any  disposition, 
so  far  as  I  know,  to  abuse  the  privilege,  my  experience  in  the  Government 
service  is  that  in  the  interest  of  proper  and  efficient  administration  it  is  always 
wise  tn  put  a  reasonable  limitation  upon  a  discretion  given  an  executive  de- 
partment. I  would  not  advocate  for  a  moment  unlimited  discretion. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Not  an  extended  discretion,  and  I  think  three  years  is  too 
lon.tr  to  keep  a  man  under  such  a  designation.  I  think  it  ought  to  be  only  for 
the  emergency,  by  declaring  that  only  an  emergent  public  interest  should  re- 
quire it.  You  would  get  a  narroAver  discretion  than  this.  The  fact  that  three 
years  is  made  the  maximum  in  this  bill  would  mean  a  designation  for  that  time. 

Mr.  CARR.  It  has  not  proved  so  up  to  date. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Your  experience  is  better  than  iny  suggestion. 

Mr.  CARR.  The  fact  is  that  the  men  who  are  brought  here,  except  in  very 
tVw  cases,  are  men  possessed  of  special  qualifications,  which  can  not  be  well 
duplicated,  men  who  have  served  much  less  than  three  years. 

Mr.  COOPER.  If  you  need  men  to  be  assigned  here,  why  not  assign  a  man  under 
a  commission,  or  whatever  you  m'ght  call  it.  for  a  definite  period,  not  to  exceed 
so  lonir.  Would  you  take  an  ambassador  aud  assign  him  to  the  State  Depart- 

24470—22 5 


56  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

ineut?  Would  you  not  simply  \\  ithdraw  him  from  his  post  of  duty  to  meet  an 
emergency  ? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Would  that  amount  to  an  assignment? 

Mr.  GARB.  That  is  what  it  does  amount  to.  The  word  "  assigned  "  was  used 
because  that  was  the  technical  word  used  in  the  law  of  1915.  wherein  it  was 
stated  that  the  President  might  assign,  without  the  confirmation  of  the  Senate, 
within  the  class,  from  one  post  to  another.  It  is  simply  the  adoption  in  this  para- 
graph of  that  language  because  that  happens  to  be  the  phraseology  used  at  that 
time. 

Mr.  COOPER.  What  effect  would  that  have  upon  an  ambassador  to  assign  him 
to  the  State  Department?  Would  you  not  withdraw  and  keep  him  there  for 
your  convenience?  You  could  probably  assign  him  as  ambassador  to  the  State 
Department  in  this  city? 

Mr.  CARR.  That  is  exactly  what  it  would  mean ;  that  he  could  be  brought  back 
just  as  any  consul  is  brought  back,  brought  back  to  the  State  Department  so 
long  as  needed,  assigned  there  in  the  sense  that  he  is  brought  into  the  place  for 
consultation,  and  sent  back  to  his  post  when  the  need  expires. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Would  the  assignment  consist  of  a  period  in  the  discretion  of  the 
department,  extending  as  long  as  the  public  necessity  required  it? 

Mr.  C.VRR.  I  would  rather  not  see  that  done.  As  I  said.  I  do  not  care,  so  far 
as  the  ambassador  or  minister  is  concerned,  I  am  perfectly  agreeable  to  see 
them  limited  to  a  few  months.  So  far  as  the  consuls  general,  consuls,  and 
secretaries  are  concerned,  I  think  that  the  Secretary  of  State  and  our  foreign 
relations  would  suffer  tremendously  by  the  inability  of  the  Secretary  to  detail 
a  reasonable  number  of  foreign  service  men  in  the  State  Department  for  con- 
siderable periods  of  time. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  One  limit  for  ministers  and  another  limit  for  foreign  service 
officers? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  have  no  objection  to  that. 

(Thereupon,  at  12  o'clock  noon  the  committee  adjourned,  to  meet  again  at  10 
o'clock  a.  m..  Thursday,  December  14.  1922.) 


COMMITTEE  ON  FOREIGN  AFFAIRS, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES. 
Washington,  Thursday,  December  14,  1922. 

The  committee  this  day  met,  Hon.  John  Jacob  Rogers  presiding. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  want  to  print  with  the  permission  of  the  committee,  first  a 
'etter  which  the  Secretary  of  State  wrote  the  President  concerning  this  general 
reorganization  plan,  dated  August  22.  1922,  with  certain  papers  accompanying 
the  letter,  which,  I  think,  will  be  helpful  to  the  committee;  second,  a  letter 
which  President  Harding  wrote  the  chairman  of  this  committee  and  to  the 
chairman  of  the  Foreign  Relations  Committee  of  the  Senate,  concerning  the 
plan ;  third,  a  letter  which  the  President  wrote  to  me  on  September  1 ;  fourth, 
a  letter  which  the  Secretary  of  State  wrote  me  concerning  the  bill  now  before 
the  committee,  dated  October  13;  and,  finally,  a  letter  which  he  wrote  to  the 
president  of  the  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  the  United  States  in  response  to  a 
letter  from  the  president  of  that  chamber  of  commerce  on  October  27,  1922. 
There  is  very  little  duplication  in  these  letters,  and  I  think  it  will  be  of  some 
value  to  the  committee  to  have  the  information  available  in  the  hearings. 

(The  letters  referred  to  are  as  follows:) 

AUGUST  22,  1922. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  PRESIDENT:  I  desire  to  place  before  you  the  accompanying  draft 
of  a  bill  for  the  reorganization  and  improvement  of  the  foreign  service,  which, 
with  your  concurrence  and  support,  I  am  disposed  to  advocate  as  a  means  of 
strengthening  this  department  and  adapting  its  machinery  to  the  exigencies  of 
post-war  conditions  in  international  affairs. 

The  proposals  contained  in  this  draft  are  similar  in  purport  to  the  provisions 
of  a  measure  (H.  R.  17)  already  landing  before  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Affairs,  but  on  which  no  action  has  as  yet  been  taken. 

The  main  purpose  is  to  lay  the  foundation  of  a  broader  service  of  trained 
men  by  removing  certain  embarrassing  limitations  in  the  present  organization 
and  giving  impetus  to  the  idea  of  diplomacy  as  a  career.  This  is  thought  to  be 


FOEK1GX   SERVICE   OF    THE    UNITED   STATES.  57 

necessary  as  a  means  of  attracting  ami  holding  the  type  of  men  capable  of 
measuring  up  to  the  new  demands. 

There  are  only  four  important  provisions  to  be  considered  : 

1.  The  adoption  of  a  new  and  uniform  salary  scale  with  a  view  to  broadening 
the  field  of  selection  by  eliminating;  the  necessity  for  private  incomes  and  per- 
mitting the  relative  merits  of  candidates  to  be  adjudged  on  the  basis  of  ability 
alone. 

2.  The  amalgamation  of  the  diplomatic  and  consular  branches  into  a  single 
foreign  service  on  an  interchangeable  basis.     This  would  relieve  the  limitations 
of  the  present  consular  cai'eer  and  effectually  coordinate  the  political  and  the 
economic  branches  of  the  service. 

3.  The  granting  of  representation  allowances,   which   would  lessen  the  de- 
mands on  the  private  fortunes  of  ambassadors  and  ministers  and  render  it 
practicable  to  promote  a  greater  number  of  trained  officers  to  those  positions. 

4.  The  extension  of  the  civil  service  retirement  act.  with  appropriate  modifi- 
cations, to  the  foreign  service.     This  has  become  necessary  for  maintaining  the 
desired  standard  of  efficiency  under  the  merit  system. 

Taking  up  these  four  points  in  the  order  mentioned,  it  may  be  further  ex- 
plained that  the  salaries  in  both  branches  of  the  service,  and  especially  those 
of  diplomatic  secretaries,  are  quite  inadequate. 

The  present  range  of  consular  salaries  is  from  $2,000  to  $8,000,  with  two  posi- 
tions at  $12.000;  that  of  diplomatic  secretaries  from  $2,500  to  $4,000,  whereas 
the  proposed  new  scale  would  be  subdivided  into  nine  classes,  ranging  from 
$3,000  to  $9,000.  Readjustment  on  this  basis  would  involve  a  substantial  in- 
crease in  the  salaries  of  diplomatic  secretaries  and  a  smaller  increase  in  con- 
sular salaries,  requiring  additional  appropriations  as  compared  with  those  of 
the  current  year  of  $328,500. 

By  assimilating  the  positions  in  the  Diplomatic  Service  with  the  correspond- 
ing positions  in  the  Consular  Service  on  the  basis  of  a  common  salary  scale  it 
would  become  possible  through  the  use  of  the  title  "  foreign  service  officer  "  as 
employed  in  the  bill  to  establish  the  two  branches  on  an  interchangeable  basis 
and  secure  the  highly  desirable  advantage,  from  the  standpoint  of  economy  and 
efficiency,  of  combined  administration. 

The  principle  of  providing  representation  allowances  is  one  which  is  well 
established  in  the  practice  of  other  nations  and  among  the  important  business 
interests  of  this  country.  In  relation  to  the  foreign  service  it  is  a  corollary  to 
the  (Jovernment  ownership  of  embassy  and  legation  buildings  abroad  as  a  means 
of  lightening  the  burden  of  personal  expense  on  our  ambassadors  and  ministers. 
While  it  is  not  deemed  advisable  to  request  appropriations  for  this  purpose  at 
the  present  time.  I  believe  it  important  that  statutory  provision  should  be  made 
therefor  in  order  that  suitable  funds  may  be  provided  at  a  later  date  and  in 
such  proportion  as  the  special  exigencies  may  require. 

Owing  to  the  length  of  time  that  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Services  have 
been  on  a  civil-service  basis,  there  are  a  number  of  positions,  especially  in 
the  Consular  Service,  being  held  by  officers  advanced  in  years  whose  retention 
impairs  the  efficiency  of  the  service  as  a  whole.  It  has  become  urgently  neces- 
sary to  provide  for  the  retirement  of  these  officers,  and  in  view  of  the  fact  that 
both  branches  of  the  service  are  well  established  on  a  civil-service  basis  it 
appears  feasible  to  bring  them  under  the  provisions  of  the  civil  service  retire- 
ment act  of  May  22.  1920,  modified  only  as  to  the  age  of  retirement,  the  rate 
of  contribution,  and  the  rate  of  annuity.  The  immediate  benefits  of  such  an 
enactment  would  be  appreciable.  In  fact,  no  proposal  in  connection  with  the 
improvement  of  the  foreign  service  commends  itself  to  my  judgment  with 
greater  force.  The  inauguration  of  the  system  of  retirement  upon  annuities 
would  entail  an  initial  appropriation  of  $50,000.  but  is  estimated  that  no 
further  appropriation  would  be  required  until  1936. 

All  the  principal  nations  have  reorganized  their  foreign  services  since  the 
war.  With  the  comparatively  slight  but  fundamental  changes  contained  in 
these  proposals,  which,  in  fact,  represent  nothing  more  than  keeping  pace  with 
the  rapid  growth  of  the  present  system.  I  feel  sure  that  a  foundation  would  be 
laid  for  a  service  which  would  compare  favorably  with  that  of  any  other  nation. 

The  total  additional  outlay  required  for  this  purpose  would  be  $378.500.  of 
which  $328.500  would  represent  an  annual  expenditure.  This  seems  to  me  a 
small  sum  when  compared  with  the  very  substantial  improvement  in  the  foreign- 
service  machinery  which  I  am  confident  would  follow  the  enactment  of  the 


58 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 


proposed  measure.  I  am  therefore  disposed  to  advocate  legislation  aloiig  these 
lines,  provided  you  feel  that  such  action  would  not  be  untimely  with  respect  to 
other  policies  and  plans. 

Sincerely  yours.  CHARLES  E.  HUGHES. 


s<-<tlc  of 


organization. 


Ambassador  _______________________________________________________  $17,  500 

Minister:  consul  general,  class  1  ____________________________________  12,000 

Minuter  ___________________________________________________________  10,000 

Consul  general,  class  2  ;  consul,  class  1  _______________________________  8,  000 

Consul  general,  class  3  ;  consul,  class  2  _______________________________  6.  000 

Consul  general,  class  4  _____________________________________________  5,500 

Consul  general  at  large;  consul,  class  3  ______________________________  5,000 

Consul  general,  class  5;  consul,  class  4  _______________________________  4,500 

Consul,  class  5;  secretary,  class  1  ___________________________________  4,000 

Secretary,  class  2  ___________________________________________________  3,  625 

Consul,  class  6  _____________________________________________________  3.  500 

Consul,  class  7;  secretary,  class  3;  vice  consul,  class  1  ________________  3,000 

Vice  consul,  class  2  _______________________________  .  __________________  2.  750 

Consul,  class  8  :  secretary,  class  4  ;  vice  consul,  class  3  ________________  2,  500 

Consul,  class  9;  consular  assistant  ____________  „  _____________________  2.000 

Consular  assistant  _________________________________________________  1,  800 

Do  ___________________________________________________________  1,650 

Do  __________________________  _________________________________  1,500 

Scale  of  salaries,  proposed  organization. 


Diplomatic  branch. 

Foreign  service. 

Consular  branch. 

Secretary  (counselor  of  embassy). 
Secretary  (counselor  oflegation). 
Secretary  Class  I. 

Secretary  Class  II. 
Secretary,  Class  III. 
Secretary,  Class  IV.i 

$17,  .500 
12,000 
10,000 

CERS. 

9,000 
8,000 
7,000 

6,000 
5,000 
4,500 
4,000 
3,300 
3,000 

Consul  general,  classes  1-2. 
Consul  general,  class  :i. 
Consul  general,  class  4,  and  con- 
sul general  at  large. 
Consul,  classes  1-2-3. 
Consul,  class  4. 
Consul,  class  5. 
Consul,  class  6. 
Consul,  class  7. 
Consul,  classes  &-9.1 

Minister,  Class  I  
Minister,  Class  II  

FOREIGN   SERVICE  OFFI 

Class  I 

Class  11  

Class  III  
Class  IV 

ClassV  

Class  VI  
Class  VII 

Class  VIII  
Class  IX  

Unclassified: 
Vice  consuls  of  career 
Interpreters. 
Student  interpreters. 
Pupils. 

>  Confirmation  by  Senate  required  on  original  commission. 

NOTE. — Confirmation  of  the  Senate  is  required  for  appointments  to  each  of  the  foregoing  grades.    Also 
when  initial  transfer  takes  place  from  consular  to  diplomatic  branch  and  vice  versa. 


THE  WHITE  Horsi:. 
iro.v/m/yfoN.  August  2Jt,  1928. 

I  am  sending  you  herewith  a  letter  addressed  to  me  by  the  Secretary  of 
State  just  prior  to  his  departure  for  Brazil.  It  covers  a  plan  for  reorganization 
and  improvement  of  our  foreign  service  which  I  think  well  deserving  of  the 
favorable  consideration  by  the  Congress.  I  will  not  attempt  to  write  in  detail 
over  the  ground  which  already  is  so  thoroughly  covered  by  the  Secretary  of 
State  in  his  letter  to  me.  You  are  aware,  of  course,  that  the  policy  pursued  in 
making  appointments  to  the  foreign  service  is  accredited  with  having  effected 
.a  very  great  improvement  in  itself.  I  cordially  believe  in  the  salary  readjust- 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  59 

ments  and  interchange  of  service  and   retirement  provisions  covered   in   the 
tentative  redraft  of  the  Rogers  bill  of  April  11,  1921.     When  your  committee 
has  the  time  for  deliberate  consideration  of  this  measure  I  shall  be  glad  if  it 
can  be  given  proper  attention. 
Very  truly  yours, 

WARREN  G.  HARDING. 

THE  WHITE  HOUSE, 
Washington,  September  1,  1922. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  ROGERS  :  I  am  inclosing  to  you  herewith  a  copy  of  letter  ad- 
dressed to  me  by  the  Secretary  of  State  prior  to  his  departure  for  Brazil.  I 
have  already  transmitted  a  copy  of  the  letter  to  the  chairman  of  the  Foreign 
Relations  Committee  of  the  Senate.  I  did  this  because  the  letter  gives  approval 
to  the  bill  which  you  sponsored  in  the  House.  I  address  you  now  because  I 
understand  that  the  Foreign  Relations  Committee  of  the  Senate  invites  the 
perfection  of  the  bill  along  the  lines  indicated  by  the  letter  of  the  Secretary 
of  State.  It  is  not  necessary  for  me  to  address  you  in  detail  in  behalf  of  this 
measure.  The  administration  has  been  very  greatly  interested  in  the  con- 
tinued improvement  of  our  foreign  service,  and  I  think  there  is  none  who  will 
dispute  that  the  proposed  salary  readjustments  and  the  provision  for  an  in- 
terchange of  service  and  the  retirement  provisions  all  tend  to  the  elevation 
of  standards  in  the  foreign  service,  which  we  so  much  desire  to  have  effected. 
It  will  naturally  accelerate  the  enactment  of  the  bill  if  the  House  can  adopt 
the  bill  you  have  sponsored  with  the  detailed  modifications  which  have  been 
suggested  by  the  State  Department.  You  can  be  sure  that  the  early  enactment 
will  be  more  than  pleasing  to  the  administration  and  make  more  certain  the 
enhancement  of  the  foreign  service  which  we  all  so  much  desire. 
Very  truly  yours, 

WAKKEN  G.  HARDING. 
Hon.  JOHN  JACOB  ROGERS, 

House  of  Representative*,  Washington,  D.  C. 


DEPARTMENT  OF  STATE, 
Washington,  October  IS,  1922. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  ROGERS  :  I  have  received  your  letter  of  August  31,  1922,  request- 
ing an  expression  of  my  views  on  H.  R.  17,  a  bill  for  the  reorganization  and 
improvement  of  the  foreign  service,  now  pending  before  the  Committee  on 
Foreign  Affairs. 

Subsequent  to  our  discussions  of  last  year,  to  which  you  refer,  I  have  devoted 
considerable  attention  to  the  needs  of  the  foreign  service,  and  have  given  lib- 
eral expression  to  my  views  in  several  public  utterances.  It  is,  therefore,  need- 
less for  me  to  emphasize  further  the  importance  of  an  adequate  foreign-Service 
machinery. 

Post-war  conditions  have  rendered  a  general  betterment  of  the  present  organi- 
zation so  imperative  that  failure  to  provide  for  reorganization  along  construc- 
tive lines  would  be  tantamount  to  retrogression. 

The  bill  (H.  R.  12543)  which  was  introduced  by  you  on  September  1,  1922, 
is  a  careful  revision  of  your  former  bill  (H.  R.  17),  and  represents  textually 
my  views  on  foreign-service  legislation.  Fundamentally  there  is  no  important 
departure  from  your  original  proposals.  The  revision  was  made  in  the  Depart- 
ment of  State  with  my  full  concurrence  and  approval,  and  has  been  submitted 
to  the  President,  by  whom.  I  understand,  it  has  been  transmitted  to  you  with 
appropriate  observations. 

The  principal  features  of  your  original  bill  (H.  R.  17)  are  as  follows  : 

1.  The  classification  of  ministers. 

2.  The  amalgamation  of  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Services  into  ;i   single 
foreign  service  on  an  interchangeable  basis. 

3.  Representation  allowances. 

4.  The  substitution  of  a  corps  of  foreign -service  pupils  for  the  present  corps 
of  consular  assistants. 

5.  A  retirement  system. 

As  the  classification  of  ministers  has  already  been  considered  and  favorably 
reported  to  the  House  by  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs  as  section  1  of  H.  R. 
10213.  there  would  appear  to  be  no  necessity  for  its  reconsideration  in  the 
present  bill. 


60  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

The  proposal  to  create  a  corps  of  foreign-service  pupils  and  to  abolish  the 
present  corps  of  consular  assistants  has  been  'eliminated  in  the  revision  for 
reasons  which  will  be  explained  later. 

Tlie  three  remaining  principles  enumerated  above  are  of  fundamental  impor- 
tance in  any  scheme  of  reorganization,  and  therefore  it  has  been  deemed  ad- 
visable, in  order  to  clarify  the  legislative  aims,  to  confine  attention  to  their 
development  without  the  intrusion  of  those  proposals  of  lesser  importance  which 
occur  throughout  the  text  of  the  original  bill. 

It  is  desirable  to  examine  first  the  inadequacies  of  the  present  system  in 
order  to  have  in  mind  the  very  definite  objects  to  be  achieved  by  the  measures 
proposed. 

The  Diplomatic  Service  is  greatly  underpaid.  It  is  well  known  that  a  man 
without  private  means,  whatever  his  ability,  can  not  accept  the  more  important 
posts  of  ambassador  or  minister,  but  of  more  immediate  importance  is  the  fact 
that  the  salaries  of  secretaries  in  the  Diplomatic  Service  are  so  low  that  the 
choice  of  candidates  is  largely  restricted  to  young  men  of  wealthy  families  who 
are  able  and  willing  to  a  considerable  extent  to  pay  their  own  way. 

It  follows  that  there  must  be  an  increase  in  the  salaries  of  diplomatic  secre- 
taries as  a  means  of  broadening  the  field  of  selection  by  eliminating  the  neces- 
sity for  private  incomes  and  permitting  the  relative  merits  of  candidates  to  be 
adjudged  on  the  basis  of  ability  alone. 

Furthermore,  if  young  men  of  the  greatest  ability  and  intellectual  ambition 
are  to  be  attracted  to  the  service  there  must  be  the  prospect  of  career,  recogni- 
tion, and  distinction ;  in  other  words,  they  must  feel  that  conspicuous  ability 
and  fidelity  will  be  rewarded  by  promotion  to  the  higher  grades.  The  classifi- 
cation of  ministers  as  proposed  in  H.  R.  10213,  to  which  reference  has  already 
been  made,  would  be  most  helpful  in  this  regard. 

The  Consular  .Service,  on  the  other  hand,  while  better  paid,  suffers  from 
great  limitations  as  a  public  career.  There  is  no  prospect  of  promotion  beyond 
the  Consular  Service,  and  it  is  with  difficulty  that  many  of  the  best  men  are 
retained  because  of  tempting  offers  constantly  made  to  them  by  the  business 
world. 

There  would  be  two  distinct  advantages  to  be  realized  from  an  amalgama- 
tion of  the  two  services  on  an  interchangeable  basis :  First,  those  highly  desir- 
able benefits  of  economy  and  efficiency  which  would  accrue  through  a  system 
of  combined  administration;  second,  a  more  effective  coordination  of  the 
political  and  the  economic  branches  of  the  service. 

The  bill  H.  R.  17  proposes  that  Intel-changeability  should  be  affected  on  the 
basis  of  the  present  scale  of  salaries  in  the  Consular  Service  after  eliminating 
the  two  existing  positions  a,t  $12,000  each,  known  as  consul  general,  class  1. 

In  view  of  the  proposed  retirement  system,  which  would  deduct  from  the  an- 
nual salary  5  per  cent  by  way  of  contribution,  this  proposed  scale  would  repre- 
sent in  effect  a  substantial  reduction  in  consular  salaries.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  present  scale  of  consular  salaries  is  already  recognized  as  inadequate,  and 
if  applied  to  the  Diplomatic  Service  it  would  not  be  sufficient  to  eliminate  the 
necessity  for  private  incomes,  and  therefore  the  interchangeability  which  it  is 
desired  to  effect  would  remain  impracticable  in  administration. 

In  order  to  reach  the  problems  more  effectively  I  have  deemed  it  of  first  im- 
portance that  a  new  and  adequate  salary  scale  should  be  adopted. 

After  a  very  careful  examination  into  the  actual  requirements  of  these  posi- 
tions it  is  thought  that  the  scale  of  salaries  proposed  in  the  revision  (H.  R. 
12543),  which  ranges  by  regular  increments  from  $3,000  to  §9,000,  would 
suffice  for  the  purposes  which  we  have  in  mind.  I  am  aware  that  the  present 
appropriating  policy  is  opposed  to  general  increases  in  rates  of  compensation 
for  personal  service,  but  the  constructive  aims  of  reorganization  and  improve- 
ment in  the  foreign  service  can  be  achieved  in  no  other  way,  and  I  therefore 
unhesitatingly  indorse  the  relatively  small  additional  outlay  which  wouid  be 
required. 

The  principle  of  providing  representation  allouances  is  one  which  is  well 
established  in  ilie  practice  of  other  nations  and  among  the  'mportant  business 
Jntrrrsis  of  this  country.  In  rein:  ion  to  the  foreign  service  it  is  a  corollary 
to  the  Government  ownership  of  embassy  and  legation  buildings  abroad  as  a 
means  of  lightening  the  burden  of  personal  expense  on  our  ambassadors  and 
ministers.  While  no  appropriations  arc  sought  for  this  pun>ose  at  ihe  present 
time,  I  believe  it  important  thai  statutory  pnnision  should  be  made  therefor 
in  order  that  suitable  funds  may  be  provided  at  a  later  date  and  in  such  pro- 
portion as  the  special  exigencies  may  require. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE 'OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  61 

Essential  as  may  be  deemed  the  foi-egoing  proposals,  the  plan  would  remain 
incomplete  and  inadequate  without  some  acceptable  system  for  the  superannu- 
ation of  officers  beyond  a  certain  age.  There  are  at  the  present  time  a  number 
of  positions,  especially  in  the  Consular  Service,  being  held  by  officers  quite 
advanced  in  years  who  are  incapable  in  this  highly  competitive  and  active 
career  of  maintaining  the  desired  standard  of  efficiency.  It  is  therefore  nec- 
essary to  provide  for  the  retirement  of  these  officers ;  and  in  view  of  the  fact 
that  both  branches  of  the  service  are  well  established  on  a  civil-service  basis, 
it  appears  feasible  to  bring  them  under  the  provisions  of  the  civil  service 
retirement  act  of  May  22,  1920,  modified  as  to  the  age  of  retirement,  the  rate 
of  contribution,  and  the  rate  of  annuity  as  proposed  in  the  bill. 

In  the  revision  (H.  R.  12543)  an  effort  has  been  made  to  arrive  at  a  soroe- 
what  simpler  form  of  expression  in  effecting  an  adaptation  of  the  existing  law. 

No  proposal  in  connection  with  the  improvement  of  the  foreign  service  com- 
mends itself  to  my  judgment  with  greater  force  than  that  of  a  suitable  retire- 
ment system  so  essential  to  efficiency  as  well  as  to  the  interests  of  the  officers 
affected  thereby. 

Adverting  to  the  proposal  that  a  corps  of  foreign-service  pupils  be  created 
and  the  present  corps  of  consular  assistants  abolished,  I  do  not  feel  that  we 
are  ready  at  this  time  for  such  a  change  in  practice.  Under  the  present  system 
young  men  who  enter  the  service  as  consular  assistants  invigorate  the  lower 
ranks  by  the  varied  resources  which  they  are  able  to  contribute  through  the 
diversified  training  acquired  in  our  schools  and  colleges.  Their  practical  edu- 
cation begins  by  actual  contact  with  the  work  in  the  field,  and  promotion  is 
won  after  a  thorough  grounding  has  boon  acquired. 

The  substitution  for  this  system  of  a  selected  corps  of  foreign-service  pupils 
might  have  the  effect  of  limiting  the  scope  of  selection  to  young  men  whose 
designation  would  be  undertaken  at  too  early  an  age  for  their  capabilities  to 
be  correctly  appraised.  We  can  always  make  appropriate  suggestions  as  to 
advisable  courses  of  study  for  young  men  contemplating  a  diplomatic  career, 
and  further  consideration  of  a  plan  for  foreign-service  pupils  seems  to  be 
advisable. 

As  you  are  aware.  I  am  deeply  interested  in  the  developing  of  the  foreign 
service  as  a  prerequisite  to  the  successful  conduct  of  foreign  affairs.  It  is 
with  great  pleasure,  therefore,  that  I  can  assure  you  of  my  hearty  cooperation 
and  support  in  securing  the  early  enactment  of  the  legislation  which  you  have 
proposed  with  those  modifications  indicated  in  the  1'evision  that  has  been 
worked  out. 

I  am.  my  dear  Mr.  Rogers, 
Sincerely  yours. 

CHARLES  E.  HUGHES. 


OCTOBEB  27,  1922. 
Mr.  JULIUS  H.  BARNES, 

President  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  the  United  States, 

Washington,  D.  C. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  BARNES  :  I  am  pleased  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  your  letter 
of  October  17,  1922,  in  which  you  bespeak  the  interest  of  your  organization  in 
providing  adequate  support  for  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Service  and  re- 
quest an  expression  of  my  opinion  as  to  the  merits  of  the  two  bills,  H.  R. 
10213.  now  awaiting  consideration  by  the  House,  and  H.  R.  12543,  now  pending 
before  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs. 

As  you  are  aware,  I  have  devoted  considerable  attention  to  this  subject,  and 
on  several  occasions  have  expressed  my  views  in  no  uncertain  terms  as  to  the 
desirability,  if  not.  indeed,  the  necessity,  of  an  adequate  foreign  service  ma- 
chinery. 

I  fully  realize  the  keen  interest  of  your  organization  in  these  proposals. 
Apart  from  considerations  of  a  general  character  which  touch  the  national 
welfare,  the  business  man  has  the  most  direct  interest  in  the  successful  con- 
duct of  foreign  relations. 

No  one  is  so  quick  to  feel  the  consequences  of  foreign  condition  and  the 
results  of  international  transactions,  whether  these  be  of  a  political  or  of  an 
economic  character. 

The  two  measures  to  which  you  refer  are  complementary,  although  differing 
widely  as  to  purport. 


62  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED  STATES. 

The  bill  H.  R.  10213  is  a  technical  measure,  designed  to  meet  the  convenience 
of  Congress  in  handling  appropriations  under  the  committee  adjustment  which 
followed  the  inauguration  of  the  Budget  system.  Through  the  accretion  by 
which  the  present  appropriating  practice  has  been  built  up  a  number  of  im- 
portant items  of  expenditure  have  become  established,  although  contrary  to  or 
unsupported  by  the  provisions  of  statute.  For  instance,  section  1682  of  the 
Revised  Statutes  provides : 

"  There  shall  be  but  one  minister  resident  accredited  to  Guatemala,  Costa 
Rica,  Honduras,  Salvador,  and  Nicaragua;  and  the  President  may  select  the 
place  of  residence  for  the  minister  in  any  one  of  these  States." 

Manifestly  this  statute  is  out  of  harmony  with  the  practice  of  sending  a 
minister  to  each  of  the  above-named  countries,  and  should  be  repealed.  The 
primary  object  of  the  bill  in  question — H.  R.  10213 — is  to  eliminate  these  incon- 
sistencies by  adjusting  the  provisions  of  statute  to  the  established  legislative 
practice  in  making  appropriations  for  the  Department  of  State  and  the  Diplo- 
matic and  Consular  Service. 

In  that  sense  it  is  more  corrective  than  constructive,  as  it  does  not  purport 
to  reorganize  or  to  improve  the  foreign  service.  There  is.  however,  one  highly 
constructive  provision  in  this  bill,  namely,  section  1,  which  proposes  an  amend- 
ment to  section  1675  of  the  Revised  Statutes  by  classifying  the  grade  of  min- 
ister into  two  classes. 

The  classification  of  ministers  is,  in  my  opinion,  correct  in  principle,  as  it 
prepares  the  way  for  an  extension  of  the  career  service  to  include  the  grade  of 
minister,  without  encroaching  upon  the  constitutional  powers  of  the  President 
in  connection  with  appointments  to  that  grade.  One  of  the  essential  require- 
ments in  any  scheme  of  general  improvement  must  be  the  incentive  of  promo- 
tion to  the  higher  grades  for  officers  in  the  career  service  who  have  demon- 
strated their  ability  and  fitness  for  such  positions. 

Apart  from  this  provision,  the  bill,  although  containing  many  features  that 
would  be  helpful  in  administration,  can  not  be  said  to  represent  the  character 
of  legislation  which  is  so  urgently  needed  for  the  building  of  a  broader  and 
more  efficient  foreign  service  machinery. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  bill  H.  R.  12543  is  designed  particularly  to  provide  for 
a  fundamental  reorganization  of  the  foreign  service. 

In  answer  to  a  recent  letter  from  Hon.  John  Jacob  Rogers,  in  which  ho 
requested  an  expression  of  my  views  on  his  former  bill.  H.  R.  17,  I  discussed 
in  detail  the  merits  of  the  proposals,  stating  that  H.  R.  12543  represents  textually 
my  views  on  foreign  service  legislation. 

For  your  information  I  inclose  herewith  a  copy  of  my  letter  to  Representative 
Rogers,  which  you  are  at  liberty  to  use  as  you  think  proper. 

It  is  indeed  gratifying  to  feel  that  your  organization  is  prepared  to  support 
these  measures.  I  am  very  deeply  interested  in  their  early  enactment,  the 
immediate  effect  of  which  would  be  appreciable  in  bringing  the  service  abreast 
of  present-day  requirements. 

We  must  maintain  an  adequate  foreign  service.  The  ultimate  cost  of  an 
inadequate  foreign  service  is  so  much  greater  than  that  of  an  adequate  one 
that  the  slight  additional  expenditures  which  would  be  required  to  raise  the 
standard  of  our  present  organization  is  insignificant  in  comparison  with  the 
benefits  that  would  accrue. 

I  will  be  greatly  pleased  to  learn  of  any  steps  which  the  Chamber  may  t;ik<- 
toward  furthering  the  educational  work  among  its  members  as  to  the  impor 
tance  and  the  merits  of  these  bills. 
Sincerely  yours, 

CHARLES  E.  HUOHKS. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.   WILBUR  J.   CARE,,   DIRECTOR  OF   THE   CON- 
SULAR, SERVICE,   DEPARTMENT  OF  STATE — Resumed. 

Mr.  CARK.  Mr.  Chairman.  I  left  off  yesterday  morning,  I  believe,  at  section 
11.  I  would  like  to  say  further  in  respect  to  that  section  that,  in  studying 
it  somewhat  more  fully.  I  believe  that  it  might  be  improved  if  it  were  amended 
on  line  5,  page  7.  after  the  words  ••  Foreign  service  inspectors."  by  inserting 
words  somewhat  like  these:  "who  shall,  under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary 
of  State,  inspect  the  work  of  the  foreign-service  officers  in  both  the  diplomatic 
and  consular  branches  of  the  foreign  service." 

That  is  a  little  more  definite  than  the  section  at  present.  I  presume,  it  is 
the  desire  of  the  commmittee.  as  I  think  it  would  be  wise  to  do.  to  place  all 


FOREIGN    SER\7ICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  63 

offices  of  the  foreign  service,  all  missions  and  consulates  alike,  under  the 
necessity  of  being  inspected  periodically. 

Mr.  COOPER.  "Who  shall."  under  the  direction  of  whom? 

Mr.  ('ARK.  Under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary  of  State  inspect  the  work 
of  officers  in  the  foreign  service  in  both  the  diplomatic  and  consular  branches ; 
that  is.  all  officers  in  the  foreign  service. 

Mr.  COOPER.  You  say  officers  in  the  foreign  service.  There  is  a  distinction 
made  here.  Ambassadors  and  ministers  are  officers  in  the  foreign  service, 
but  are  not  foreign-service  officers  under  this. 

Mr.  CARR.  That  is  true.  But  in  the  first  section  of  this  bill  it  states  that 
hereafter  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Service  shall  be  known  as  the  foreign 
service. 

Mr.  COOPER.  That  includes  the  ambassadors  and  ministers. 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  COOPKR.  Do  you  want  these  inspectors  to  inspect  ambasssidors  and 
ministers? 

Mr.  CARR.  Their  offices. 

Mr.  COLE.  At  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of  State. 

Mr.  MOORES.  He  made  the  point  yesterday  that  all  the  legations  and  embassies 
ought  to  be  inspected. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  think  the  Secretary  of  State  ought  to  have  an  opportunity  to 
know  how  the  affairs  of  all  of  the  offices  are  managed. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  think  it  is  scandalous  that  we  have  not  hitherto  inspected 
diplomatic  offices. 

Mr.  COOPER.  The  office  of  ambassador  is  of  such  dignity  that  I  think  the  fact 
that  a  subordinate  officer  like  an  inspector  was  inspecting  the  ambassador 
would  not  add  very  much  to  the  dignity  or  the  effectiveness  of  the  work  in  that 
particular  country. 

Mr.  CARR.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  that  is  precisely  what  is  done  in  the  British 
service,  through  an  office  that  was  created  within  three  or  four  years.  They 
have  fashioned  their  inspection  system  somewhat  like  our  own  consular  in- 
spection system  and  have  extended  it.  and  now  and  then,  as  occasion  requires, 
they  send  an  inspector  into  diplomatic  missions. 

Mr.  ('OLE.  We  have  no  sacred  white  elephants  in  the  Republic? 

Mr.  COOPER.  I  am  not  talking  about  sacred  white  elephants.  I  am  simply 
talking  about  the  effect  it  would  have  upon  the  people  of  England,'  or  the  Dip- 
lomatic Service  there,  to  have  a  subordinate  officer  going  into  the  embassies 
inspecting?  Would  you  go  into  all  of  his  work,  or  just  the  financial  side  of  ft? 

Mr.  CARR.  You  understand  that  the  ordinary  embassy  nowadays  has  a  lari^e 
staff,  a  large  clerical  staff,  a  large  secretarial  staff,  and  expends  a  lot  of  money. 
During  the  late  war  some  of  those  officers  spent  hundreds  of  thousands  of 
dollars,  and  there  has  therefore  been  no  method,  no  machinery,  by  which  their 
business  operations,  the  correctness  of  their  expenditures,  etc..  would  be  exam- 
ined into  on  the  spot. 

Mr.  fooi-Ei!.  These  inspectors  would  be  authorized  to  inspect  nothing  relating 
to  the  diplomatic  work,  nothing  of  that  sort;  just  the  financial  side? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  would  inspect  the  management  of  the  office,  cost  of  upkeep, 
care  of  Government  property,  and  whether  men  are  working  full  time  or  not. 

In  most  of  the  items  of  the  expenses  of  a  mission  you  gentlemen  are  as  much 
interested  as  the  Secretary  of  State.  As  we  become  owners  of  embassy  build- 
ings involving  thousands  of  investment  it  will  become  imperative  that  inspec- 
tions be  both  frequent  and  thorough.  I  might  say  further  that  Mr.  Lay  calls 
my  attention  to  the  fact  that  several  of  our  ambassadors  have  expressed  their 
desire  that  their  offices  be  periodically  inspected,  and  that  is  not  strange,  for 
all  consular  officers  who  are  doing  well  can  hardly  wait  until  the  inspector  gets 
around  to  them. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Shall  agents  under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary  of  State  in- 
spect the  offices  of  the  foreign  service,  both  Diplomatic  and  Consular? 

Mr.  CARR,  Yes.  sir.  I  should  say  further  that  when  Mr.  Stewart,  who  is 
here  now  and  was  our  inspector  for  the  Near  East,  when  he  visited  Russia 
the  ambassador  himself  requested  him  to  make  a  complete  inspection  and 
investigation  of  the  offices  of  the  embassy,  its  accounts,  and  the  methods  of 
conducting  business.  On  several  occasions  the  Secretary  of  State,  being  with- 
out any  machinery  for  inspecting  diplomatic  offices,  has  detailed  a  consular 


64  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

inspector  to  inspect  the  operation  of  a  particular  mission.  There  is  no  reason 
why  any  head  of  a  mission  should  object  to  inspection.  It  is  not  a  public  mat- 
ter: it  does  not  humiliate  or  interfere  with  him.  but  it  aids  him. 

FOREIGN  SERVICE  OFFICERS*  BONDS. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Diplomatic  officers  are  not  bonded,  are  they'? 

Mr.  CARR.  They  are  not.  and  the  purix>se  of  the  provision  in  this  bill  is  to 
bond  all  foreign-service  officers. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Below  the  rank  of  minister? 

Mr.  CARR,  Yes. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Why  should  not  an  ambassador  or  minister  be  bonded? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  department  has  not  recommended  it  and  has  not  brought 
itself  yet  to  pass  upon  that  question,  but  my  own  personal  opinion  is  that 
every  man  who  is  responsible  for  the  handling  of  money  in  the  foreign  service 
ought  to  be  under  bond  to  the  Government  for  a  correct  accounting  for  the 
money,  whether  he  is  the  head  of  a  mission,  an  ambassador,  minister,  or  consul 
general,  counselor  or  vice  consul. 

Mr.  BROWNE.  Has  the  Government  ever  lost  anything  by  defalcation  of  an 
ambassador  or  minister? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  do  not  recall  any  case  in  which  the  Government  lias  lost. 

Mr.  MOORES.  I  think  it  has  lost  prestige  in  one  case  that  I  know  of. 

Mr.  CARR.  But  I  do  recall  that  there  have  been  occasions  when  secretaries, 
for  instance,  have  not  accounted  for  money  which  they  have  drawn  from  the 
Treasury  and  there  has  been  no  reimbursement  made. 

Mr.  MOORES.  We  all  understand  that  a  minister  and  ambassador  has  mani- 
fold diplomatic  and  social  duties ;  that  he  has  no  voice  in  the  selection  of  his 
subordinates,  unless  it  be  possibly  a  poorly  paid — not  secretary — but  clerk,  and 
a  stenographer  or  two.  Is  it  fair  to  put  on  a  minister  or  an  ambassador  a 
pecun'ary  liability  to  the  Government  for  the  defalcations  of  subordinates  with 
whose  selection  he  has  nothing  to  do?  I  do  not  think  it  is. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  should  think  it  should  be  on  precisely  the  same  basis  as  a  consul 
general  or  a  consul,  whose  subordinates  are  chosen  usually  by  the  department 
and  not  by  himself,  and  who  are  assigned  to  his  office  not  upon  his  express 
request  but  because  the  department  thinks  they  should  be  assigned.  It  is  true 
that  all  vice  consuls,  consular  assistants,  all  interpreters,  and  men  of  that 
kind  are  bonded.  In  the  diplomatic  missions  the  head  of  a  mission  is  not 
bonded,  neither  are  the  secretaries  bonded.  It  seems  to  me  that  sound  business 
pr;nciples  should  require  that  the  should  be  bonded. 

Mr.  MOORES.  Let  me  say.  if  I  give  a  bond  in  a  State  or  county  office,  where 
I  have  the  selection  of  my  subordinates.  I  have  a  perfect  right  to  take  from 
every  one  of  them  an  indemnity  bond. 

Mr.  CARR.  Exactly. 

Mr.  MOORES.  The  minister  or  ambassador  could  not  so  indemnify  himself. 
because  he  has  no  voice  in  the  selection  of  his  subordinates:  and  I  do  not 
think  that  is  fair. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  How  does  it  differ  from  the  practice  that  exists  in  every  post 
office?  The  postmaster  has  no  voice  in  the  selection  of  carriers,  clerks,  or 
other  employees,  but  is  bonded  for  the:r  acts  and  omissions. 

Mr.  MOORES.  I  think  everyone  who  handles  money  is  under  bond  to  the  Gov- 
ernment. 

Mr.  COLE.  Yes. 

Mr.  MOORES.  The  postmaster  is  required  by  law  to  spend  eight  hours  a  day 
in  his  place  of  business  and  be  is  supposed  to  supervise  everything.  He  can  not 
do  that  without  the  consent  of  the  Postmaster  General  or  his  Assistant.  He 
can  not  leave  h-'s  post  office;  he  has  got  to  be  there  to  supervise  the  business 
of  the  Government.  With  the  ambassador  or  minister,  the  duties  are  manifold. 
He  does  not  have  to  and  it  would  not  be  fair  to  require  him  to  stay  and  super- 
vise the  ordinary  business  of  an  embassy  or  legation.  I  think  there  is  a  very 
great  distinction  there.  I  think  you  are  wrong  there.  You  are  not  often  wrong, 
but  I  believe  you  are  wrong  in  asking  bonds  from  them. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Let  me  make  a  suggestion.  The  title  of  ambassador :  it  seems  to 
me  rather  strange,  to  require  him  to  give  bond — an  ambassador,  a  plenipo- 
tentiary— have  him  give  a  bond  not  to  steal  money? 

Mr.  CARR.  As  I  say.  that  exact  point  is  not  involved  in  this  bill. 

Mr.  COOPER.  It  is  not  in  the  bill,  but  you  suggest  that  they  give  bond. 


FORKIGX    SERVICE    OF    THH    UNITED    STATES.  65 


JK>  I'1'1'"'  !*ei?.y  tbat  J  ('Un  llluke  is  that  T  think  iT  lias  l» 
practice  of  Congress  to  require  some  form  of  security  for  every 
man    who  handles   Goveniment  money. 

Mr    COLE.  Would    it  be  possible  to*  bond  them  against  making  any   foolish 

'  ' 


Mr  CAISK.  That  \vould  involve  too  much  of  a  question  of  judgment.  I  am 
afraid,  to  be  practicable. 

Mr.  Cow;.  I  am  more  concerned  about  that  than  about  the  financial  transac- 
tions. 

Mr.  CARU.  I  would  like  to  say  in  respect  to  this,  that  this  bill  as  I  understand 
it  does  not  call  for  bonds  for  ministers  and  ambassadors,  but  in  respect  to  those 
below  the  grade  of  minister  I  think  they  ought  to  be  bonded 

Mr.   COOPKK.  That    is   right. 

Mr.  CARR.  It  works  out  in  this  way.  In  practice  the  ambassador  or  the  min- 
ister entrusts  the  actual  operation  of  handling  money,  and  the  management  of 
his  office  to  one  or  more  of  his  secretaries.  In  a  large  embassy  the  business 
of  the  office  is  divided  up,  one  secretary  having  charge  of  passports,  another 
secretary  having  charge  of  commercial  matters,  another  of  gathering  informa- 
tion. and  each  with  a  force  of  men  under  him.  They  are  responsible  for  the 
work  of  their  sections.  They  ought  to  be  bonded  as  much  as  any  consul  or  vice 
consul  ought  to  be  bonded,  in  my  judgment.  Whether  yon  extend  it  to  ambassa- 
dors and  ministers  is  a  matter  for  your  judgment.  But  I  personally  do  not 
see  any  difference  between  bonding  the  head  of  a  mission  and  bonding  the 
head  of  a  large  consulate  general. 

Mr.  Ro(,i:i;s.  I  think  the  committee  would  like  to  relieve  Mr.  Carr  from  tes- 
tifying. He  1ms  been  at  it  four  days  now.  and  I  suggest  that  we  allow  Irm 
to  proceed  as  rapidly  as  is  consistent  with  bringing  out  the  information. 

Mr.  CAKU.  Going  on  to  section  13.  I  think  I  have  already  discussed  that. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Did  you  discuss  section  12? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes,  I  discussed  section  12  yesterday. 

I  think  it  is  unnecessary  to  discuss  section  13  further,  since  I  dis- 
cussed that  the  other  day.  I  would  suggest  that  after  section  13  it  would  be 
in  the  interest  of  good  legislative  practice  in  the  future  if  you  should  insert  an 
authorization  for  the  payment  of  post  allowances  in  such  sums  as  Congress 
may  appropriate. 

Mr.  MOOBKS.  Have  yon  anything  to  add  on  that?  I  apprehend  that  will  be 
the  hardest  section  in  the  whole  bill  to  save  on  the  floor  of  the  House,  and  if 
you  have  anything  to  say  in  favor  of  it,  I  would  be  glad  to  hear  it. 

Mr.  COOPER.  I  did  not  get  your  last  suggestion. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  said  that  I  thought  that,  in  addition  to  section  13,  authorizing 
representation  allowances,  appropriations  for  representation  allowances  in  such 
sums  as  you  may  decide  to  grant  in  the  future  —  none  is  asked  for  at  the  present 
time  —  that  you  also  include  another  section  authorizing  the  present  practice  of 
appropriating  post  allowances,  so  that  the  authorization  may  exist  in  the  event 
that  some  exigency  should  arise.  Our  understanding  is  that  if  this  bill  is  passed 
the  present  post-allowance  appropriation  would  be  absorbed  in  the  increase  in 
salaries,  and  the  present  appropriation  for  post  allowances  would  be  discon- 
tinued. But  there  might  an  exigency  arise  again  as  it  did  in  1918  when  imme- 
diate action  would  be  required,  and  under  the  present  rules  of  the  House  you 
would  have  to  have  a  prior  authorization,  which  would  be  general  legislation 
coming  before  this  committee.  It  would  take  considerable  time  to  get  that 
authorization  through  the  House  and  considerable  more  time  to  get  the  appro- 
priation under  such  authorizing  legislation.  If  such  appropriations  could  be 
authorized  in  a  bill  like  this,  it  might  save  much  time  in  the  future.  You 
would  have  entire  control  as  to  whether  you  would  appropriate  or  not.  hut  if 
you  should  desire  to  appropriate  you  could  do  it  speedily. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  think  you  have  already  fully  discussed  section  14. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  would  suggest  the  insertion  of  a  section  between  section  14  and 
section  15,  a  section  to  modify  that  part  of  the  act  of  July  1,  1916,  which 
authorizes  the  President  to  designate  and  assign  any  secretary  of  class  1  as 
counselor  of  embassy  or  legation,  and  suggest  that  the  act  be  amended  to  read  : 

"  Provided.  That  the  President  may.  whenever  he  considers  it  advisable  to 
do  so.  designate  and  assign  any  Foreign  Service  officer  as  counselor  of  embassy 
or  legation." 

At  present  the  law  reads-: 

•'The  President  may  assign  any  secretary  <>f  class  1  as  counselor  of  embassy 
"!•  legation." 


66  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

I  would  like  to  see  that  amended  so  as  to  be  the  assignment  of  any  secretary 
that  the  President  may  deem  proper  to  assign,  and  also  any  consular  officer 
that  the  President  may  deem  it  proper  to  assign,  by  simply  using  the  all- 
inclusive  term,  foreign  service  officer.  That  would  give  complete  elasticity 
by  permitting  the  President  to  draw  on  both  branches  of  the  service  in  the 
designation  of  men  to  occupy  the  position  of  counselor,  which  is  recognized 
in  all  foreign  services  as  a  necessary  position  and  which  has  been  heretofore 
recognized  in  our  own. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Put  that  at  the  end  of  line  23. 

Mr.  CABB.  Yes. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Just  what  is  that  language? 

Mr.  GARB.  "  Provided,  That  the  President  may,  whenever  he  considers  it  ad- 
visable so  to  do.  designate  and  assign  any  foreign  service  officer  as  counselor 
of  embassy  or  legation." 

Mr.  ROGERS.  That  is  a  new  section,  is  it  not? 

Mr.  CARR.  It  is  really  a  proviso  at  the  end  of  section  14. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Is  it  a  natural  proviso  to  make  to  section  14,  which  deals,  it 
seems  to  me.  with  quite  another  subject? 

Mr.  GARB.  Not  entirely  pertinent  to  that  section,  it  is  true. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  It  is  really  an  amendment  to  the  existing  law.  I  should  think 
it  would  be  better — I  am  asking,  not  asserting — to  make  it  a  section  which 
would  read  something  like  this:  Section  so-and-so,  of  act  so-and-so,  is  hereby 
;i  mended  to  read  as  follows. 

Mr.  CARR.  You  could  do  it  this  way :  "  That  part  of  the  act  of  July  1.  1916, 
which  authorizes  the  President  to  designate  or  assign  any  secretary  of  class  1 
as  counselor  of  embassy  or  legation  is  hereby  amended  to  read  as  fotlov,- : 
That  the  President  may,"  etc.  It  is  immaterial  to  me  how  it  is  done  so  long  as 
it  is  done. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  suppose  a  proviso  ought  to  have  some  relation  to  the  subject 
matter  which  precedes  the  proviso. 

Mr.  CARR.  Technically  ;  yes. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  was  not  quite  clear  that  this  did. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  think  your  point  is  well  taken. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Make  the  period  a  year,  and  then  begin  a  new  sentence,  "That 
the  President  may."  and  include  it  all  in  section  14,  not  as  a  proviso — what  you 
have  just  suggested. 

Mr.  CARR.  That  is  all  right. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  think  you  have  not  discussed  section  15  at  all. 

Mr.  CARR.  Section  in  makes  it  possible  for  the  President  to  appoint  any  for- 
eign-service officer  to  act  as  commissioner,  charge  d'affaires,  minister  resident, 
or  diplomatic  agent  for  such  period  as  the  public  interests  may  require  without 
loss  of  grade,  class,  or  salary,  subject  to  the  usual  constitutional  requirements. 

What  that  means  is  that  a  foreign -service  officer,  who  is  a  secretary  or  consul 
general,  let  us  say.  may  he  sent,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  ninseiit  of  the 
Senate,  as  a  minister  resident.  charg£  d'affaires,  or  diplomatic  agent  for  such 
time  as  may  be  desirable,  and  when  that  duty  ceases  return  to  his  regular  func- 
tions, meanwhile  receiving  tlie  salary  which  the  law  provides  that  he  shall 
receive.  In  other  words,  it  does  not  disturb  his  place  in  his  grade,  does  not 
take  him  out  of  the  grade  lie  regularly  occupies,  and  yet  makes  him  available 
for  special  service  under  another  appointment. 

Mr.  COOPIK.  Will  you  please  define  a  minister  resident  as  distinct  from 
minister? 

Mr.  <'AI:K.  A  minister  resident  is  merely  a  lower  grade  of  diplomatic  awnt 
under  the  rules  defined  by  the  congress  of  Vienna,  a  lower  grade  of  diplomatic 
officer,  a  grade  lower  than  envoy  extraordinary  and  minister  plenipotentiary. 

Mr.  COOPER.  He  has  not  the  full  powers  of  a  minister  plenipotentiary? 

Mr.  CARR.  In  practice  there  is  really  no  distinction  made  between  the  actual 
powers  of  a  minister  resident  and  the  envoy  extraordinary  and  plenipotentiary. 
The  office  of  minister  resident  is  employed  where  an  officer  of  a  higher  grade 
than  charg6  d'affaires  or  diplomatic  agent  is  desii'ed  and  a  lower  grade  than 
that  of  envoy  extraordinary  and  minister  plenipotentiary.  Whether  a  repre- 
sentative should  be  appointed  as  envoy  extraordinary  or  minister  resident 
would  be  determined  largely  by  th'>  practices  of  other  governments  in  respect 
to  their  representation  in  a  particular  capital  to  which  it  was  desired  to  send 
a  representative;  or  it  might  be  that  for  a  special  reason  a  government  might 
desire  to  increase  the  importance  of  its  mission  by  giving  the  higher  designa- 
tion or  the  reverse  by  employing  the  lower  one.. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE    OF   THE    UNITED   STATES.  67 

Air.  COOPEK.  It  seems  to  me  the  question  of  duties  would  be  paramount  there. 
If  a  minister  resident  has  the  power  of  a  minister  plenipotentiary,  then  we 
are  trying  to  do  something  which  will  evade  the  restriction  of  the  Constitution 
in  the  appointment  of  a  minister. 

Mr.  GARB.  No,  sir;  because  this  appointment  would  be  made  as  usual  with 
the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate. 

Air.  COOPER.  Yes. 

Air.  CABR.  There  is  no  intention  of  disregarding  that  requirement. 

Air.  ROGERS.  Is  there  more  than  one  minister  resident? 

Air.  CARR.  At  the  present  time  there  is  in  our  service  one,  and  that  is  in 
Liberia.  He  carries  on  diplomatic  relations  in  the  manner  that  any  minister 
would. 

Air.  ROGERS.  It  is  largely  a  matter  of  salary.    What  is  the  salary? 

Air.  CARR.  He  gets  $5.000. 

Air.  COOPER.  I  would  like  to  ask  Air.  Carr  to  take  up  the  paragraph  in  sec- 
tion 15 :  "  That  within  the  discretion  of  the  President,  foreign-service  officers 
of  class  1  may  be  appointed  to  act  as  commissioner,  charge  d'affaires,"  etc. 

Would  that  take  the  action  of  the  United  States  Senate? 

Air.  CARR.  As  to  commissioners,  no,  sir.  It  has  been  the  consistent  practice  of 
this  Government  for  the  President  to  appoint  commissioners  without  the  advice 
and  consent  of  the  Senate,  and  it  is  frequently  done  now  by  taking  a  diplomatic 
secretary  or  a  consul  general  and  making  him  commissioner. 

Air.  COOPER.  A  commissioner  may  be  appointed,  in  the  discretion  of  the  Presi- 
dent. Then  you  say  charge  d'affaires,  minister  resident,  etc.  Would  a  minister 
resident  require  confirmation? 

Air.  CARR.  My  recollection  is  that  it  has  always  been  the  practice  to  appoint 
ministers  resident  only  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate. 

Air.  COOPER.  Ought  not  that  to  be,  then,  as  it  is  now,  "  within  the  discretion 
of  the  President,  he  may  appoint  a  commissioner,  who  does  not  require  confirma- 
tion, a  charg^  d'affaires-,  minister  resident,  not  minister  plenipotentiary,  or 
diplomatic  agent,  for  such  period  as  he  may  wish"?  Would  not  that  imply 
that  the  President  could  appoint  anyone,  in  his  discretion,  without  regard  to 
confirmation  by  the  Senate? 

Air.  CABB.  I  do  not  think  that  the  President  would  presume  to  interpret  that 
as  meaning  that  he  could  ignore  the  well-established  practice  of  submitting 
nominations  of  that  sort  to  the  Senate,  as  required  by  the  Constitution. 

Air.  ROGERS.  I  think  the  Constitution  would  stop  it. 

Air.  COOPER.  That  is  true,  if  the  nrnister  res-'rtent  is  the  same  as  a  minister. 

Air.  ROGERS.  He  has  certainly  to  be  a  minister. 

Air.  CARR.  He  has  to  be  a  minister  under  our  practice;  even  a  secretary  of 
embassy  is  under  our  practice  a  public  minister  within  the  meaning  of  the  Con- 
stitution, in  so  far  as  nomination  and  confirmation  are  concerned. 

Air.  COOPER.  What  does  the  word  "resident"  there  mean? 

Air.  CARR.  It  means  a  minister  resident  at  the  capital. 

Air.  COOPER.  The  minister  plenipotentiary  is  supposed  to  reside  there.  What 
does  the  word  "resident"  after  the  word  "minister"  mean?  What  does  i' 
apply  to? 

Air.  CARR.  In  the  rules  adopted  by  the  Congress  of  Vienna  in  Hi.",  they  graded 
the  different  diplomatic  representatives,  beginning  with  ambassador,  coming 
down  then  to  envoy  extraordinary  and  minister  plen'potent  ary.  Then  again 
to  charge  d'affaires  and  then  by  smother  rule  they  agreed  that  minister  resident 
should  rank  between  chorge  d'affaires  and  minister  plenipotentiary. 

Air.  COCKRAN.  That  minister  resident  is  not  perhaps  like  iho  rank  of  am- 
bassador in  the  court  of  Pumpernickel. 

Air.  CARR.  These  different  grades  are  employed  according  to  the  character 
of  the  representation  that  a  government  desires  to  have  in  a  particular  country. 

Mr.  COOPER.  I  think  it  is  not  the  size  or  the  prosperity  of  the  power  to  which 
he  is  sent,  but  it  is  the  function  of  the  officer  himself.  That  is  the  point. 

Air.  ('ex  KRAX.  That  is  very  interesting.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  is  it  not  more 
a  question  of  dignity  in  the  officer  himself? 

.Mr.  CARR.  It  is  a  question  of  dignity.  Air.  Skinner  reminds  me  that  in 
former  times  it  was  customary  to  employ  the  title  of  "  resident  "  for  the  perma- 
nent representative  resident  in  a  country  or  in  a  capital,  and  that  when  it 
became  desirable  to  appoint  a  special  representative  of  greater  dignity  or  for 
a  special  negotiation  the  title  "  envoy  extraordinary  "  would  be  employed.  At 
one  time  these  titles  were  synonymous.  Now  that  of  "minister  resident"  has 


68  FOREIGN    SERVICE    OF    TfJ  K    UNITED    STATES. 

come  to  mean  the  lowest  grade  of  diplomatic  representative  accredited   to  a 
sovereign  or  head  of  a  State. 

.Mr.  COOPER.  You  provide  that  within  the  discretion  of  the  President  he  may 
appoint  charges  d'affaires.  That  does  not  take  confirmation  by  the  Senate.  The 
commissioner  does  not  require  continuation. 

Mr.  CARE.  I  beg  your  pardon.     A  charge  d'affaires  does  require  confirmation. 
Mr.  COOPER.  A  commissioner  does  not? 
Mr.  (.'ARK.  A  commissioner  does  not. 
Mr.  COOPER.  A  minister  would? 
Mr.  CARU.  Yes. 

Mr.  COOPER.  That  would,  then,  in  the  same  paragraph  provide  for  the  appoint  - 
n;fiit  in  the  discretion  of  the  President  of  an  officer  who  does  not  require  con- 
tinuation, like  a  commissioner,  and  a  minister  who  does,  because  they  are  not 
in  the  discretion  of  the  President.  One  is  within  the  discretion  of  the  Presi- 
dent exclusively  because  it  does  not  require  confirmation.  The  other  one  is 
in  his  discretion  to  nominate  but  not  to  appoint.  The  appointment  requires 
continuation  by  the  Senate  in  the  case  of  a  minister.  That  is  what  I  was 
getting  at. 

Mr.  CARR.  As  I  understand  this  section,  it  only  has  really  to  do  with  the 
preservation  to  officers  so  assigned  of  their  regular  classification  and  salary. 
It  does  not  enter  into  or  touch  the  question  of  manner  of  appointment,  because 
obviously  no  law  passed  by  Congress  can  alter  the  fact  that  the  minister  resi- 
dent and  charge  d'affaires  are  public  ministers  under  the  Constitution  and 
must  be  appointed  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate.  No  law 
that  you  can  pass  would  alter  that  fact  and  no  President  would  seek  to  evade 
that  provision. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Then  the  law  is  saying  "  that  the  President  in  his  discretion  " 
..N  not  apt  language.  He  can  not  do  it  in  his  discretion:  it  takes  confirmation 
by  the  Senate.  The  President  can  nominate  a  minister,  and  he  can  take  a 
commissioner  in  his  discretion  and  assign  him  for  any  period.  That  is  not  in 
his  discretion  except  by  confirmation  of  the  Senate.  I  wonder  if  it  is  apt 
language  to  put  them  all  in  the  same  paragraph. 

Mr.  CAKR.  His  discretion  would  be  exercised  in  the  selection  of  a  certain 
grade  of  officer  and  not  in  the  appointment  of  that  officer. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Proceed  to  section  16.  I  think  that  has  all  been  pointed  out 
in  substance  to  the  committee  in  connection  with  another  bill. 

Mr.  CARR.  Section  16  authorizes  the  special  detail  of  foreign-service  officers 
outside  of  the  city  of  Washington  and  the  payment  of  actual  necessary  ex- 
penses under  certain  circumstances.  That  is  already  the  law.  having  been 
made  so  by  the  statute  of  February  5,  1915,  with  this  exception :  That  law 
says,  "Any  secretary  in  the  diplomatic  service,  consul  .  general  or  consul"; 
while  this  bill  provides  that  "  any  foreign-service  officer  "  may  he  so  detailed. 

In  other  words,  this  section  adapts  the  present  law  to  this  particular  bill, 
that  is  all.  It  also  changes  the  per  diem  from  $5  per  day  to  $8  per  day  when 
foreign-service  officers  are  engaged  upon  this  special  temporary  duty. 

I  would  suggest  a  further  amendment  also,  after  the  word  "  Washington  ' 
in  line  6,  page  8  of  the  bill  (section  16),  that  it  he  specifically  stated,  "  within 
the  United  States  or  abroad." 

In  the  first  place,  the  purpose  of  the  section  as  it  now  stands  and  the  manner 
in  which  it  is  executed,  is  to  give  a  diplomatic  or  consular  officer  on  duty  in 
the  department,  who  is  ordered,  let  us  say.  to  Philadelphia  or  New  York  to 
attend  a  conference,  a  trade  conference,  for  instance,  a  per  diem  of  $8  a  day 
while  engaged  on  that  work,  because  otherwise  he  would  have  to  pay  part  of 
his  expenses  from  his  own  pocket,  which  would  be  entirely  unfair.  It  makes 
it  clearer  to  add  the  words  "within  the  United  States."  because  that  is  what 
it  applies  to. 

Mr.   COOPER.  At   what  point? 

Mr.  CARE.  Line  6.  after  the  word  "Washington." 

Mr.  COOPER.  To  say.  "within  the  United  States." 

Mr.  CARR.  Or  abroad. 

Mr.  CWKEAN.  You  could  say  ''within  the  United  Stairs  <>r  :d>m»d."  That 
includes  Washington. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  would  like  also,  if  the  committee  should  agree  with  it,  that  the 
words  "or  abroad"  l>o  added.  In  going  to  and  coming  from  a  post  the  law 
permits  a  per  diem  of  s.~>  a  day  for  subsistence  in  travel.  P.ut  in  a  special 
;.ssiirnm»>iit  f«»r  some  special  duty,  away  from  the  post  abroad,  an  officer  can 
not  g*-t  along  on  $5  a  day  jn  these  days.  T  inive  in  my  mind  an  occasion  when 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  69 

a  lot  of  our  ships  in  tlie  port  of  Bordeaux  caused  such  an  acute  situation  result- 
ing in  complaint  against  the  consulate,  I  telegraphed  the  consul  general  at 
Paris  to  send  Mr.  Lay  down  to. Bordeaux  to  look  into  that  situation.  Under 
our  present  regulations,  Mr.  Lay  could  only  be  paid  $5  a  day.  What  did  it 
cost  you,  Mr.  Lay? 

Mr.  LAY.  It  cost  about  $35  above  my  expenses,  above  the  expenses  that  wore 
allowed  me  by  the  Government. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Not  $35  a  day'.' 

Mr.  LAY.  For  the  trip. 

Mr.  COCKUAX.  For  how  many  days? 

Mr.  LAV.  I  was  obliged  to  spend  much  more  than  I  was  able  to  collect  from 
the  Government — in  excess  of  the  $•>. 

Mr.  COCKKAN.  For  how  many  days'  service'.' 

Mr.  LAY.  I  was  there  nearly  two  weeks. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  About  $2.50  a  day. 

Mr.  LAY.  I  may  say  that  I  was  ordered  while  at  home  on  leave  to  the 
National  Foreign  Trade  Conference  in  Chicago  in  1919.  at  which  I  delivered  an 
address,  on  the  instructions  of  the  department,  in  respect  to  trade,  and  that 
trip  cost  me  about  $40  out  of  my  own  pocket  above  the  limits  of  the  amount 
that  could  be  collected  from  the  Government.  The  department  was  kind  enough 
to  reserve  a  hotel  room  for  me  in  Chicago.  The  cost  of  the  room  alone  was 
$4  a  day,  so  I  had  left  a  dollar  for  subsistence  above  my  room,  which,  of  course, 
was  not  sufficient. 

Mr.  CAKK.  That  occurs  in  every  case  where  an  officer  of  the  department  is 
ordered  at  the  request  of  a  foreign  trade  convention  to  confer  with  business 
men  or  to  make  an  address  before  a  business  men's  convention,  and  I  submit 
the  present  allowance  is  not  adequate. 

Mr.  MOOUES.  If  you  will  allowe  me  a  suggestion,  I  think  you  ought  to 
modify  your  amendment  a  little  bit.  because,  if  you  say  outside  of  the  city  of 
Washington  and  within  the  United  States  or  abroad,  that  language,  within  the 
United  States  may  be  taken  as  ascripsio  loco,  and  I  think  it  would  be  better  to 
put  the  amendment  after  the  word  "  duty."  In  the  first  place,  duty  any  place 
outside  of  the  city  of  Washington  or  abroad,  and  then  insert  the  words  "  or 
abroad,"  for  the  reason  that  I  do  not  want  some  comptroller  to  construe  that 
language,  "  within  the  United  .States,"  as  simply  a  description  of  the  location  of 
the  city  of  Wahington.  That  is  what  it  amounts  to. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  You  could  cure  the  difficulty  by  saying  "  outside  the  city  of 
Washington,  either  in  the  United  States  or  abroad." 

Mr.  COCKKAX.  "  Whether  in  the  United  States  or  abroad." 

Mr.  CAKK.  I  will  be  very  grateful  for  anything  that  you  can  suggest  that 
will  protect  us  from  unfortunate  decisions  of  the  comptroller. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  We  want  to  protect  the  bill  from  ambiguity. 

Mr.  IlooEus.  Section  17.  the  retirement  section,  is  long  and  somewhat  intri- 
cate. Mr.  Carr  and  Mr.  Skinner  have  explained  that. 

Mr.  CARR.  Mr.  Chairman,  before  we  reach  that  I  would  like  to  suggest  to  the 
committee  for  its  consideration  this  section,  to  be  inserted  after  section  16. 
I  do  not  know  whether  you  would  feel  that  it  ought  be  to  inserted  or  not: 

"  That  whenever  he  deems  it  to  be  in  the  public  interest  the  Secretary  of  State 
is  authorized  to  order  to  the  United  States  for  trade  conference  work  any  foreign 
service  officers  who  have  performed  three  years  or  more  of  continued  service 
abroad:  Provided,  That  in  all  such  cases  the  expense  of  travel  and  subsistence 
shall  be  allowed,  in  the  same  manner  and  under  the  same  conditions  as  those 
applying  to  foreign  service  officers  going  to  and  returning  from  their  posts." 

That  is  to  say.  where  a  man  who  has  been  three  years  in  a  post,  let  us  say. 
Johannesburg,  has  information  which  a  trade  conference  in  the  United  States 
might  find  very  useful  to  have  explained  to  them,  the  department  would  have 
the  privilege  of  ordering  him  home,  and  pay  his  expenses  and  the  expenses  of 
his  family  in  the  same  way  that  they  are  paid  now  in  going  to  his  post,  keeping 
him  here  as  long  as  it  might  be  necessary  for  the  trade  conference  work,  con- 
suming his  leave  of  absence  for  that  purpose,  or  so  much  as  might  be  necessary, 
and  then  send  him  back.  I  think  such  conferences  would  be  in  the  interest  of 
making  the  foreign  service  officers  more  useful  than  they  now  are,  in  connection 
with  tiie  promotion  of  our  trade  relations,  and  would  also  make  better  Americans 
of  them. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Do  you  not  think  it  is  a  very  wholesome  thing  to  bring  back  these 
men  from  the  field  to  their  own  country  just  as  often  as  practicable?  When  a 
man  gets  older,  more  experienced,  and  level-headed,  the  danger  of  losing  his  hea-1 


70  FOREIGN    SERVICE    OF    THK    VNITKD    STATES. 

and  his  Americanism  is  not  so  extreme.  But  I  have  seen  some  of  these  young 
secretaries,  who  have  had  exceptional  social  opportunities  and  advantages  in 
the  capitals  abroad,  become  the  most  abject  followers  of  the  social  regime  in 
the  foreign  capital.  One  of  the  things  that  I  hope  is  going  to  follow  from  this 
•bill  is  to  send  some  of  .these  de-Americanized  secretaries  to  Singapore  as  vice 
consul,  or  to  force  them  out  of  the  service.  I  hope  also  that  The  tendencies  of 
the  administration  and  the  tendencies  of  our  law  will  be  to  bring  these  younger 
men,  and  perhaps  the  older  men,  back  to  the  United  States  as  often  as  possible 
so  that  they  may  not  lose  their  Americanism,  which  is  the  biggest  asset  they 
have  and  the  biggest  asset  to  the  country. 

Mr.  COCKKAN.  I  quite  agree  with  you.  but  I  think  this  bill  will  increase  in- 
stead of  diminish  that;  but  that  is  what  experience  will  demonstrate.  I  myself 
would  not  let  thorn  stay  in  the  diplomatic  posts  more  than  four  years.  I  would 
like  to  see  such  a  system  put  into  operation  and  see  how  it  will  work.  In  that 
way  we  could  give  all  the  talent  of  the  country  an  opportunity. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  am  grateful  to  Mr.  Rogers  for  expressing  a  sentiment  that  up  to 
the  present  moment  I  had  not  had.  perhaps,  the  courage  to  voice.  His  views 
coincide  with  my  views  exactly.  If  this  bill  has  any  purpose  whatever,  it  should 
have  the  purpose  of  putting  more  Americanism  into  our  foreign  service,  in  both 
branches  of  it,  and  in  making  it  more  responsive  to  the  practical  needs  of  our 
]>eople  and  Government  rather  than  to  encourage  the  members  to  devote  their 
energies  to  acquiring  social  prestige  and  the  manners  and  customs  of  foreign 
countries.  I  want  to  see  every  diplomatic  and  consular  officer  in  the  foreign 
service  thoroughgoing  Americans  in  touch  with  business  affairs  and  responsive 
to  the  aspirations  of  the  people  of  the  United  States,  both  small  and  great,  able 
accurately  to  interpret  the  people  of  the  United  States  to  the  people  of  foreign 
countries  and  to  win  their  respect,  confidence,  and  good  will.  I  think  this  bill 
should  do  much  in  that  direction  if  it  has  the  effect  which  those  of  us  who  are 
in  sympathy  desire. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  You  siiggest  an  amendment  to  be  added  to  section  16  or  as 
an  independent  section? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  would  suggest  it  as  a  separate  section  after  section  16,  making 
it  section  17,  page  8. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  We  are  ready  to  proceed  now.  Have  you  any  comments  of  your 
own  with  reference  to  the  retirement  section? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  have  one  comment  to  make  by  way  of  a  possible  proviso. 

Mr.  COCKKAN.  At  what  point? 

Mr.  CARR.  To  insert,  after  the  word  "excluded."  line  IS.  page  It.  the  words: 

"Provided,  That  the  President  is  authorized  to  establish  by  Executive  order 
a  list  of  places  in  foreign  countries  which,  by  reason  of  the  severe  climatic  or 
other  extreme  conditions,  are  to  be  classed  as  unhealthful  posts,  and  each  year 
of  service  at  such  post,  inclusive  of  the  regular  leave  of  absence,  shall  be 
counted  as  two  years  in  reckoning  the  length  of  service  of  foreign-service  offi- 
cers for  the  purposes  of  retirement." 

By  that  I  mean  and  submit  to  you  the  question  of  whether  it  is  not  fair  to 
give  that  allowance  of  double  time  to  a  man  who  goes  to  Saigon  or  to  Batavia 
or  to  Singapore  or  to  Boma  or  to  the  West  Coast  of  Africa.  These  places  are 
very  trying,  from  the  standpoint  of  climate  and  wear  and  tear  on  men's  health  : 
and  men  who  serve  there  should.  I  think,  have  credit  for  double  the  amount  of 
service  given  to  men  in  places  like  Berlin.  Paris,  and  Marseilles. 

Mr.  FISH.  Do  you  know  that  that  has  been  tried  out  in  the  Army  and  found 
very  unsatisfactory:  that  they  got  double  time  for  service  in  the  Philippines 
and'  outside  of  the  continental  limits  of  the  United  States?  That  was  repealed. 
I  think,  in  1912.  for  purposes  of  retirement. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  did  not  know  of  the  Army  experiment,  but  I  do  know  that  it  is 
a  practice  that  has  for  years  been  followed  in  foreign  services  in  certain  other 
Governments. 

Mr.  FISH.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  no  white  man  could  live  at  Singapore  3." 
years,  or  any  place  of  that  character?  There  are  parts  of  the  world  where  you 
would  send  these  officers  where  no  white  man  could  live  ::.".  years  to  be  eligible 
for  retirement:  so  that  you  can  practically  exclude  that. 

Mr.  CARR.  That  is  perfectly  true,  but  as  a  matter  of  fact,  they  would  not  be 
kept  any  such  length  of  time  in  a  post  of  that  kind,  even  if  they  could  he.  But 
in  the  administration  of  the  service,  the  readiness  of  men  to  go  to  undesirable 
posts  which  would  follow  a  provision  of  this  kind  would  change  the  whole 
morale. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES.  71 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  I  entirely  agree  with  you.  and  it  is  not  only  desirable,  but 
necessary,  but  if  you  apply  the  matter  in  its  rationality  and  send  any  man 
to  those  places,  it  would  not  be  necessary  to  retire  him ;  he  can  not  live'  there. 
No  white  man  can  live  there  35  years,  at  least,  I  have  not  heard  of  one. 

Mr.  CARR.  My  desire  is  to  see  a  provision  of  this  kind  in  order  that  the 
service  could  be  made  to  operate  with  as  much  fairness  to  all  members  of  the 
service  as  possible. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Have  you  that  amendment  in  writing  that  you  suggest? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  You  might  leave  it  with  the  clerk. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Would  not  that  be  a  difficult  provision  to  administer?  Would 
not  there  be  a  tremendous  pressure  to  increase  the  classification  of  localities  as 
unhealthful? 

Mr.  CARR.  No.  As  a  matter  of  fact.  I  think  the  President  could  issue  an 
executive  order  establishing  the  unhealthful  posts  on  the  basis  of«the  absolute 
facts,  that  would  convince  every  member  of  this  committee  of  its  wisdom  and 
fairness,  and  I  do  not  believe  that  we  would  have  much  difficulty  in  maintain- 
ing the  list  indefinitely. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Can  you  insert  in  that  provision  some  language  to  the  effect 
that  the  number  of  such  posts  should  not  exceed  6  or  8  or  10? 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  I  should  hope  not.    Conditions  might  change. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  think  that  would  be  a  wide-open  avenue  and  that  we  ought 
to  have  some  limitation  of  it. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  In  connection  with  Naples,  my  recollection  is  that  it  was  at 
one  time  most  unhealthy,  and  also  Yera  Cruz  was  formerly  intolerable. 

Mr.  COOPER.  And  Habana. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  You  would  give  the  President  discretion  and  he  would  not 
be  likely  to  abuse  it.  and  if  you  could  not  trust  him  to  fix  the  number  of  posts, 
that  the  sanitary  condition  would  justify  fixing,  you  ought  not  to  trust  him 
with  anything.  It  is  a  provision  which  in  the  nature  of  things  has  to  be 
elastic.  As  I  say.  I  recollect  myself  places  which  were  in  the  past  deemed 
unhealthy. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Such  as  Panama. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Of  course.  When  you  came  close  to  Naples,  you  were  aware 
of  its  proximity  long  before  your  eyes  discovered  it;  the  smell  extended  for 
30  or  40  miles. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  If  you  happened  to  have  the  right  wind. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  In  lines  16.  17.  and  18  it  is  provided  that  in  computing  the 
longevity,  "  all  periods  of  separation  from  the  service  and  so  much  of  any 
period  of  leave  of  absence  as  may  exceed  six  months  shall  be  excluded." 

Why  do  you  give  a  man  six  months'  credit  when  he  has  a  leave  of  absence? 

Mr.  COCKKAN.  Where  do  you  find  that  language? 

Mr.  ROGKRS.  I 'use  9,  lines  10  to  18. 

Mr.  MCXIRES.  A  man  at  Calcutta  ought  to  be  able  to  go  to  Simla,  if  he  is  sick 
in  the  summer  time,  and  ought  to  have  credit. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Six  months'  leave  of  absence  is  credited  to  his  actual  service 
under  this  language.  He  only  gets  60  days'  leave  a  year,  as  I  understand  it. 

.Mr.  CARR.  Sixty  days'  leave  a  year  with  pay  plus  time  going  to  and  coining 
from  his  post.  Now.  there  are  cases,  and  they  probably  make  up  most  of  the 
cases  of  men  who  obtain  leave  of  absence  for  as  long  as  six  months,  where 
leave  is  extended  beyond  60  days  on  account  of  illness. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  know  of  cases  where  young  men  have  wanted  to  go  on  a  pro- 
tracted hunting  trip  and  have  gotten  leave  of  absence  for  six  months.  It  may 
be  picayunish.  but  there  does  not  seem  to  me  to  be  any  particular  reason  why  a 
six  months'  hunting  trip  should  be  treated  as  service  within  the  meaning  of 
this  law. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Why  not  put  in  that  any  man  by  reason  of  illness  not  exceed- 
ing six  months  shall  have  credit?  I  do  not  think  he  should  be  credited  for  time 
outside  of  the  six  months'  leave  of  absence. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  have  no  objection  to  that. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  meets  your  objection.  Mr.  Chairman? 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Entirely. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  have  no  desire  to  give  anybody  credit  for  six  months'  leave  to 
enable  him  to  go  on  a  hunting  trip. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Ought  any  other  reason  except  sickness  to  justify  a  man  foi 
having  that  kind  of  allowance  of  service? 

24470—22 6 


72  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

Mr.  CAKR.  It  might  well  be  considered  whether  a  foreign  service  officer  might 
not  at  some  time  be  separated  from  this  particular  service  to  undertake  other 
work  for  the  Government,  in  which  case  his  right  to  retirement  pay  should  be 
protected.  That  situation  would  hardly  arise  frequently,  however. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Turning  to  page  10,  line  o,  subdivision  (d),  Ambassador  Fletcher 
wrote  me,  calling  my  attention  to  the  fact  that  although  ministers  were  in- 
cluded in  this  subdivision,  he  himself,  who  had  worked  up  from  the  ranks  to  be 
ambassador,  was  for  no  apparent  reason  excluded.  I  understand  from  con- 
versation that  you  see  no  objection  to  including  ambassador,  so  as  to  cover 
Mr.  Fletcher's  case? 

Mr.  CARR.  There  is  nothing  I  should  like  better  than  to  see  ambassadors  and 
ministers  included. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  They  would  not  be  excluded  if  they  had  served  the  full  term 
of  2.~>  years. 

Mr.  C'ARR^This  would  exclude  ambassadors,  because  ambassadors  are  not 
mentioned  in  this  section.  On  page  10  only  ministers  are  mentioned. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  There  would  not  be  more  than  one  or  two  in  the,  service  that 
would  come  under  it. 

Mr.  MOORES.  If  there  is  only  one,  he  ought  to  be  taken  care  of. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  Continuous  service  of  25  years. 

Mr.  CARR.  At  present  there  are  two  who  would  be  entitled  to  retirement  with 
pay  if  their  positions  were  mentioned  in  this  bill. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  I  do  not  see  why  they  should  not  be. 

Mr.  CARB.  They  should  be. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  That  would  be  excluding  men  on  account  of  the  excellence  of 
their  service.  If  a  man  goes  up  from  the  lower  ranks,  with  35  years'  con- 
tinuous service,  and  ends  with  the  rank  of  ambassador,  he  ought  to  be  emi- 
nently entitled  to  it. 

Mr*  CAKR.  Quite  so. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Line  14 :  "  The  rate  of  deduction  in  the  case  of  foreign-service 
officers  shall  be  a  sum  equal  to  5  per  cent  of  the  basic  salary."  There  ought  to 
be  a  5  per  cent  provision  for  ministers  or  ambassadors  if  you  should  include 
them. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  That  is  subdivision   (e). 

Mr.  CARR.  That  is  covered  by  the  preceding  subsection  (d)  : 

"Any  minister  or  person  holding  any  official  position  in  the  Department  of 
State  at  the  time  this  act  becomes  effective  who  subsequent  to  November  26, 
1909,  occupied  the  position  of  secretary  in  the  Diplomatic  Service,  and  any 
foreign-service  officer  who  may  hereafter  be  promoted  to  the  grade  of  minister 
or  appointed  to  any  official  position  in  the  Department  of  State,  shall  be  entitled 
to  all  the  benefits  of  this  act  in  the  same  manner  and  under  the  same  condi- 
tions as  a  foreign-service  officer." 

If  you  think  that  is  not  broad  enough,  of  course  it  ought  to  be  rectified,  but 
it  had  been  thought  that  this  subsection  would  cover  it. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  Why  not  put  in  there  the  rate  of  deduction  in  the  case  of  any 
persons  coming  under  this  act  shall  be  equal  to  5  per  cent?  % 

Mr.  ROGERS.  It  strikes  me,  taking  (d)  and  (e)  together  as  they  now  are, 
that  the  minister  gets  the  benefit  of  the  retirement  provision  and  lias  no  money 
exacted  from  his  salary. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  He  does  not  pay  the  fiddler. 

Mr.  CARR.  You  might  say  the  rate  of  deduction  in  the  case  of  all  officers  t<> 
which  this  bill  applies 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  That  it  shall  be  5  per  cent. 

Mr.  MOORES.  Who  shall  be  eligible  to  retirement. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  In  a  case  like  that  of  Mr.  Fletcher,  who  gets  a  salary  of  $17,500, 
why  should  he  chip  in  5  per  cent  of  his  salary,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  his 
maximum  annuity  is  no  larger  than  if  he  received  a  salary  of  about  half  of 
what  in  fact  he  receives? 

Mr.  CARR.  The  best  way  I  can  answer  that  is  to  cite  the  case  of  the  gentle- 
men in  the  civil  service  here  in  Washington,  who  are  entitled  to  retirement 
under  the  civil-service  retirement  fund. 

Mr.  FISH.  Practice. 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes.  If  they  are  receiving  $3,000  a  year  they  have  to  pay  2A  per 
cent  of  that  into  the  retirement  fund,  which  is  the  same  rate  applied  to  the 
man  who  gets  $800  a  year,  but  when  they  come  up  for  retirement  at  age  of  70. 
the  most  they  can  expert  is  S720  a  year.  Outside  of  the  extreme  case  which 
the  chairman  has  mentioned,  the  application  of  the  principle  of  retirement  to 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  73 

the  foreign  service,  as  made  by  this  bill,  is  much  more  equitable  than  that 
made  by  the  present  civil-service  retirement  law  in  its  application  to  people 
employed  in  the  classified  civil  service,  because  this  bill  takes  into  consideration 
the  amount  of  salary  and  gives  a  man  retirement  pay  pro  rated  according  the 
salary  that  he  has  received. 

Mr.  FISH.  I  think  I  can  point  out  what  the  system  is.  I  am  introducing  at 
the  request  of  the  enlisted  personnel  of  the  Army  a  25-year  retirement  bill. 
They  are  paid  from  $21  up  to  the  first  sergeant,  $157.  The  sergeants  are  the 
ones  most  interested  in  it  and  have  been  in  communication  with  me  most.  The 
bill  is  one  that  will  increase  the  pay  of  the  different  grades  of  private  up  to 
first  sergeant.  $30  each,  and  deduct  1  per  cent  from  each  of  the  grades.  Of 
course,  the  sergeants'  deduction  of  1  per  cent  is  vastly  more  than  that  of  the 
private  who  only  receives  .$21,  but  they  all  get  the  same  amount,  $30  more, 
so  there  is  no  complaint  even  among  the  sergeants.  You  will  find  that  is  the 
general  practice  in  retirement.  According  to  that  principle  an  ambassador 
would  not  have  much  complaint. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  I  think  it  would  be  a  great  blemish  on  this  bill  to  leave  an  am- 
bassador who  has  worked  his  way  up  from  the  lower  grades  to  the  highest 
without  some  provision  for  his  retirement.  The  most  excellent  would  have 
the  greatest  hardship. 

Mr.  FISH.  I  do  not  expect  to  be  ambassador  until  GO.  and  then  have  five  years 
before  retiring. 

Mr.  CAKK.  It  occurs  to  me  you  might  adopt  here  a  principle  that  is  a  slight 
modification  of  that  employed  by  several  foreign  Governments  in  their  systems 
of  retirement  of  foreign-service  officers.  They  compensate  their  officers  by  a 
double  system  of  compensation — basic  salary  plus  local  allowances — similar 
to  what  is  known  in  our  legislation  as  post  or  representation  allowances. 

Mr.  COCKKAX.  I  know  what  it  is. 

Mr.  CARR.  They  base  their  rate  of  retirement  pay  upon  the  basic  salary  and 
not  upon  the  local  allowance.  You  could  adopt  in  this  bill,  possibly,  the  prin- 
ciple of  a  contribution  computed  on  the  basic  salary  of  foreign -service  officers 
up  to  .$9,000  and  not  require  contributions  based  on  so  much  of  the  salary  as 
might  exceed  $9.000. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  Ministers  get  $10,000. 

Mr.  FISH.  Is  not  that  a  question  for  the  executive  session? 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  I*  would  like  to  have  some  suggestion  from  the  department 
which  has  stated  it.  The  department  has  paid  attention  to  that  question  of 
working  out  an  equitable  system  of  determining  it.  Did  you  Consider  at  all  the 
case  of  ambassadors  in  working  out  this  bill? 

Mr.  CAKK.  Not  any  further  than  I  have  already  indicated. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Mr.  Rogers  has  brought  an  entirely  new  element  in  here.  I 
think,  practically,  it  would  not  amount  to  very  much,  but  suppose  only  one  or 
two  ambassadors  would  come  within  the  operation  of  this  bill,  nevertheless. 
I  think  it  ought  to  be  made  to  fit  every  case  if  we  can.  The  retirement  fund 
that  an  ambassador  would  get  would  be  $4.800  under  this  bill? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  He  would  be  contributing  about  $850  a  year. 

Mr.  MOORES.  That  is  a  serious  burden. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Five  per  cent  of  $17.500.  Therefore,  the  contribution  that  he 
would  be  making  to  this  fund  would  be  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  amount  in 
the  case  of  any  other  officers. 

Mr.  FISH.  How  many  ambassadors  have  we  at  the  present  time? 

Mr.  ('ARK.  Thirteen.  I  believe.  Only  two  of  them  would  be  eligible  to  retire- 
ment under  this  bill. 

Mr.  COCKKAX.  Anyone  of  them  might  be  removed  in  a  change  of  administra- 
tion to-morrow. 

Mr.  CAKK.  Certainly. 

Mr.  COOPER.  A  great  deal  lias  been  said  about  Mr.  Fletcher.  Where  is  he 
now? 

Mr.  CARR.  Belgium. 

Mr.  COOPKK.  Was  he  here  in  tho  State  Department? 

Mr.  CAKK.  He  was  Undersecretary  of  State  for  over  a  year.  Prior  to  that 
time  h»>  was  ambassador  to  Mexico.  He  was  out  of  the  service  a  short  time 
between  the  time  he  was  ambassador  to  Mexico  and  the  time  of  his  appoint- 
ment as  Undersecretary  of  State.  Ht-  was  ambassador  to  Chile  and  had  been 
minister  to  Portugal,  and  before  that  was  at  various  posts  in  the  Diplomatic 
Service. 


74  KORKKiX    SKHVICE    OF    THK    TXITHD    STATES. 

Mr.  COOPER.  When  we  severed  diplomatic  relations  with  Mexico,  did  Mr. 
Fletcher  cease  to  he  anihassador? 

Mr.  CAKR.  Not  immediately,  sir;  no.  He  was  in  this  country  a  long  time 
either  on  leave  of  absence  or  at  the  State  Department. 

Mr.  COOPER.  Did  he  draw  salary  as  an  anihassador  after  we  had  severed  dip- 
lomatic relations  with  Mexico? 

Mr.  CARR.  My  recollection  is  that  he  did. 

Mr.  COOPER.  For  how  many  yearsV 

Mr.  CARR.  T  do  not  know  :  'l  think  it  was  a  matter  only  of  months. 

The  CHAIKMAX.  To  refresh  your  recollection,  Mr.  Carr.  Mr.  Fletcher  was 
stationed  in  the  State  Department  in  dirext  charge  of  Mexican  affairs.  I  know. 
as  I  was  in  close  touch  with  the  Mexican  situation  at  the  time,  and  I  saw  him 
a  numher  of  times  in  connection  with  Mexican  matters. 

Mr.  CARR.  He  was  brought  back  by  the  Secretary  of  State  for  consultation. 
That  finally  developer]  into  his  taking  charge  i.f  Mexican  affairs  in  the  State 
Department.  They  were  at  a  critical  stupe  at  that  particular  time.  He /-on Id 
not  function  in  Mexico  City,  and  yet  there  were  many  things  that  had  to  he 
done,  and  he  was  held  in  the  department  for  that  purpose:  I  do  not  remember 
exactly  the  length  of  time.  That  was  done  under  the  last  administration. 

Mr.  COOPKR.  Mexico  at  that  time  had  no  representative  here? 

Mr.  CARR.  None  that  we  recognized. 

Mr.  COOPER.  That  is  to  say,  strictly  speaking,  there  were  no  diplomatic  rela- 
tions between  the  two  countries? 

Mr.  CARB.  Not  in  the  sense  of  Government  dealing  with  Government,  but 
there  were  a  great  many  things  that  had  to  be  done  in  connection  with  Mexico. 

Mr.  COOPER.  I  have  in  mind  that  yesterday  when  I  called  attention  to  section 
14  bringing  back  ministers,  I  only  suggested  bringing  back  an  ambassador  and 
having  him  receive  the  emoluments  of  the  office,  as  indicating  that  we  had 
severed  diplomatic  relations,  and.  strictly  speaking,  hv  had  no  diplomatic  func- 
tions to  perform. 

Mr.  <  'AKR.  A  situation  arose  during  the  last  administration  where  the  Presi- 
dent decided  that  as  a  manifestation  of  his  displeasure  over  something  that  the 
Government  of  Costa  Rica  had  done  he  would  withdraw  his  minister.  He 
expected  that  to  have  the  effect  of  causing  the  Government  to  modify  the  action 
that  he  objected  to.  when  possibly  he  could  return  the  minister  to  his  post.  He 
held  the  minister  here  under  orders,  hoping  that  the  condition  in  the  other 
Government  would  be  modified  so  as  to  make  it  feasible  to  send  the  minister 
back.  It  was  not  modified  and  the  minister  stayed  here,  perhaps  in  the  opinion 
of  some  people  too  long.  After  a  reasonable  length  of  time  the  department 
refused  to  continue  to  pay  his  conn  ten  sat  ion  and  told  him  he  would  have  to 
go  on  leave  without  pay. 

Mr.  COOPER.  How  long? 

Mr.  CARR.  In  that  case.  !  think,  the  minister  was  here  sonic  six  <>r  nine 
months.  Kut  I  hope  you  see  what  was  involved  there.  It  was  not  any  dis- 
position to  bring  an  officer  back  here  on  salary  and  squander  Government  money. 
but  it  was  a  gesture  to  create  a  certain  effect  on  the  other  country  and  cause 
it  to  modify  its  course  in  connection  with  the  protection  of  certain  American 
interests  in  that  country. 

Mr.  Cooi'Ki:.  1  had  also  in  mind  the  Keren  sky  government,  which  had  here  a 
minister  or  ambassador,  so  called.  Mr.  Hahkmeteff.  The  Kerensky  government, 
as  everybody  knows,  was  a  government  on  horseback,  lasting  but  a  few  months. 
Nevertheless,  ho  stayed  here  and  had  the  title  of  ambassador,  and  got  a  great 
amount  of  money,  representing  a  government  which  did  not  exist  at  all  and 
country  with  which  we  had  no  diplomatic  relations  whatever.  I  did  not  want 
anything  to  creep  into  this  bill  which  might  bring  the  possibility  of  a  repetition 
of  a  case  of  that  kind. 

Mr.  CAIM:.  I  hope  we  will  never  reach  the  condition  where  any  such  thing  as 
you  suggest  will  be  necessary  for  this  Government. 

Mr.  COOPKR.  We  had  no  diplomatic  relations  with  Mexico  whatever.  The  am- 
bassador is  recalled.  He  has  no  diplomatic  functions  to  i>erform  whatever,  and 
yet  he  draws  the  salary  of  ambassador.  It  is  an  analogous  condition  to  the 
Russian  situation. 

Mr.  CARI:.  I  may  say  this,  that  in  respect  to  the  particular  ambassador  of 
our  own  country,  of  whom  you  arc  speaking,  he  was  industriously  performing 
work  relating  to  Mexico  every  moment  of  the  time.  Tie  was  doing  as  much 
tdr  this  Government  as  if  he  had  been  in  Mexico  City. 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATKS.  75 

The  CHAIRMAN.  As  a  matter  of  justice  to  Mr.  Fletcher.  I  desire  to  also  say 
that  (luring  the  entire  time  he  was  in  the  State  Department  he  was  devoting 
all  of  his  energies  to  the  Mexican  situation  and  was  extremely  helpful,  and 
according  to  my  recollection  now  he  remained  there  about  nine  months  ami 
then  resigned. 

Mr.  CARB.  That  is  true. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Because  he  did  not  agree  with  the  "  watchful-waiting  "  policy 
of  Mr.  Wilson. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  think  it  is  a  safe  statement  to  make  that  the  work  that  he  did 
here  while  he  was  in  consultation  with  the  Secretary  in  connection  with  Mexican 
affairs  was  fully  equal  in  importance  to  any  work  that  he  would  have  done 
had  he  been  in  the  active  occupation  of  his  post  in  Mexico  City. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Are  we  ready  to  proceed  with  the  two  remaining  sections'.? 

Mr.  MOORES.  Let  me  ask  that  Mr.  Carr  draft  an  amendment  to  cover  that 
situation. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  shall  be  glad  to  do  so. 

Mr.  MOORES.  And  submit  it  to  us  at  our  next  session. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  What  is  that? 

Mr.  MOORES.  Draft  an  amendment  to  cover  the  case  of  Mr.  Fletcher  and 
other  similar  cases  and  submit  to  us.  It  is  your  suggestion  that  they  submit 
to  us  at  the  next  meeting  of  the  committee  a  draft  of  an  amendment. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  To  cover  section  14. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Is  there  anything  in  sections  IS  or  19  that  does  not  speak  for 
itself,  or  have  you  anything  that  you  want  to  add? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  have  nothing  to  say  in  regard  to  those  sections.  I  think  it  is 
perfectly  clear  what  they  mean  and  they  do  not  seem  to  me  to  require  any 
explanation.  I  would  like  to  add  this  word  in  concluding  my  testimony:  As 
one  who  has  been  for  years  primarily  interested  in  building  up  a  foreign 
service  for  this  Government  that  will  be  thoroughly  American  in  character. 
that  will  be  thoroughly  businesslike  in  operation,  that  will  give  at  least  a 
return  of  dollar  for  dollar  on  the  amount  invested  and  as  much  more  in 
the  way  of  dividends  on  the  investment  as  possible.  I  sincerely  believe  that  you 
have  before  you  a  bill  that  will  enormously  improve  both  our  diplomatic  and 
our  consular  services.  It  is  the  best  constructive  measure  to  that  end.  I 
believe,  that  I  have  yet  seen  laid  before  this  committee.  I  feel  that  if  you  can 
pass  it  in  substantially  the  form  in  which  it  is.  with  such  improvements  as 
may  suggest  themselves  to  you.  that  you  will  provide  a  sound  and  adequate 
basis  upon  which  to  build  a  strong  foreign  service,  with  diplomatic  and  consular 
branches,  that  will  begin  at  once  to  do  for  this  Government  abroad  much  of 
that  which  you  ardently  desire,  and  which  as  opportunity  therefor  is  afforded 
you  can  further  extend  and  'broaden  with  the  least  possible  delay,  so  as  to 
give  us  in  the  near  future  a  foreign  service  the  equal  of  which  no  other 
government  possesses. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  understand  you  want  to  bring  in  some  amendments  cover- 
ing the  matters  we  have  been  discussing.  Let  me  suggest  this  to  you,  that  you 
devote  a  little  attention  to  how  ambassadors  could  be  included  in  the  operation 
of  this  bill  without  seriously  affecting  this  present  structure. 

Mr.  CAHI:.  Do  you  mean  in  simply  the  retirement  provision? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Yes. 

Mr.  CARB.  Or  do  you  mean  in  the  provision  of  creating  a  situation  which 
would  encourage  young  men  entering  the  service  to  feel  that  they  may  aspire 
to  rise  to  that  grade? 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  The  whole  scope  of  this  bill  has  that  in  view.  The  only  sug- 
gestion we  make  now  is  with  reference  to  the  retirement  plan,  that  the  am- 
bassadors— there  are  probably  few  but  of  very  great  excellence — should  not 
be  excluded  from  the  beneficial  operations  of  the  bill.  If  that  can  be  worked 
out,  without  seriously  interferring  with  the  structure  of  the  measure,  along 
the  line  of  Mr.  Kogers's  suggestion. 

Mr.  FISH.  Do  you  think  it  would  be  proper  to  add  a  provision  here  covering 
the  acquisition  of  embassies  in  this  bill? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  believe  that  that  particular  provision  would  hardly  be  germane 
to  this  measure.  It  is  in  a  measure  already  before  the  House. 

Mr.  FISH.  It  is  in  a  modified  form.  Why  could  you  not  get  the  committee 
up  or. get  me  up  a  bill  covering  that  situation,  creating  a  fund,  so  that  that, 
fund  could  be  expended  regardless  of  the  present  law  that  we  have  been  carry- 
ing nut.  a  fund  of  $5,000,000  to  be  administered  by  a  commission,  the  Secretary  of 


76  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

State,  or  what  not,  to  acquire  those  properties,  either  building  them  or  acquir- 
ing them? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  would  be  delighted  to  study  that  question  and  give  you  all  the 
help  I  can. 

Mr.  FISH.  I  will  introduce  it  and  I  ani  sure  the  committee  will  consider  it. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  The  committee  feels  very  grateful  to  Mr.  Carr  for  his  helpful 
testimony  upon  rhe  conditions  surrounding  the  foreign  service  and  its  needs.  On 
Monday  Mr.  Skinner  spoke  briefly  and  it  was  deemed  wise  to  ask  him  to  sus- 
pend so  that  Mr.  Carr  could  lay  down  a  foundation,  as  it  was  felt  thar  Mr. 
Skinner's  testimony  thereafter  would  be  more  valuable.  If  the  chairman  of 
the  committee  approve,  may  we  go  on  to-morrow  with  Mr.  Skinner  testifying? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  At  10  o'clock  sharp,  as  usual. 

(Thereupon  the  committee  adjourned  to  meet  again  at  10  a.  in.  Thursday. 
December  14,  1922.) 


COMMITTKE  ON  FOREIGN  AFKAIliS. 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES. 
~\Va*hhifFttnt.  Friday.  December  J.I,   /.'<:>.'. 

The  committee  this  day  met.  lion  John  Jacob  Rogers  presiding. 
Mr.  ROGERS.  Mr.  Skinner,  you  were  asked  to  suspend  by  the  committee  in  th<- 
midst  of  your  testimony  on  Monday  so  that  Mr.  Carr  could  lay  the  foundation 
for  the  bill  in  detail,  and  the  committee  have  had  the  privilege  of  hearing  Mr. 
Carr  for  three  or  four  days.  What  we  would  like  from  yon,  if  you  please,  is 
comment  of  a  practical  nature  resulting  from  your  long  experience  in  the  field, 
with  an  attempt  at  avoidance  of  mere  cumulative  material. 

STATEMENT  OF  BOBEBT  P.  SKINNEB,  CONSUL  GENEBAL  TO  LON- 
DON,  ENGLAND. 

Mr.  SKINNKR.  Mr.  Chairman,  this  bill  is  a  business  bill.  Its  outstanding  pur- 
pose is  to  protect,  encourage,  and  assist  our  commercial  and  other  business  rela- 
tions abroad,  which  are  so  intimately  intertwined  with  our  political  relations 
as  to  be  practically  inseparable.  It  attempts  to  provide  a  better  business 
organization  of  our  foreign  service.  It  is  in  line  with  your  departmental  reor- 
ganization scheme  here  at  home.  It  gives  you  an  organization  with  one  head 
instead  of  two  organizations  with  two  heads  occupying  the  same  field. 

It  gives  the  Executive  power  to  cut  out  duplication  and  to  coordinate  various 
activities,  and  it  lays  the  foundation  for  a  trained  personnel  from  whom  the 
I 'resident  can  draw,  if  so  disposed,  those  higher  d'plomatic  officers  who.  under 
the  Constitution,  can  be  named  by  him  as  he  deems  best.  I  frankly  say.  as  one 
ot  the  men  from  the  field,  that  we  hope  in  time  he  will  find  it  to  his  advantage 
and  convenience  to  seek  those  higher  officers  from  the  trained  sen-ice.  However, 
the  bill  imposes  no  such  requirement  nor  can  any  bill  amend  the  well-established 
constitutional  practice  in  this  respect.  You  have  been  told  that  tlr's  measure 
sets  up  no  principle  not  already  recognized  to  some  extent  in  our  existing  legis- 
lation. It  does  introduce  one  novel  administrative  feature  not  novel  in  the 
practice  of  other  countries  but  in  our  own.  and  it  is  the  vital  feature  of  thes,- 
proposals.  That  feature  is  the  destruction  of  the  wall  now  existing  between 
the  diplomatic  and  consular  branches  of  the  service,  a  perfectly  useless  wall,  the 
only  obvious  effect  of  which  is  to  tend  to  create  a  caste  among  officeholders,  a 
wall  which  prevents  your  diplomatic  secretaries  from  obtaining  a  working 
knowledge  of  business  affairs,  prevents  your  consuls  from  obtaining  an  insiir! ;' 
into  the  processes  of  centra!  government,  and  deprives  the  Secretary  of  State 
from  employing  available  talent  where  it  may  most  usefully  be  applied. 

The  men  now  in  office  can  not  be  changed  in  their  characters  or  habits  of 
thought  by  this  or  any  other  bill.  You  are  legislating  only  incidentally  for  them. 
But  1<>  or  !•">  years  from  now.  if  th's  bill  passes,  you  will  have  created  a  new.  a 
more  efficient  clnss  of  public  servant  true  to  type,  like  the  splendid  fellows  who 
come  out  of  the  Military  and  Naval  Academies:  men  who.  while  possessing  a 
proper  appreciation  of  the  amenities  of  life  will  also  have  an  equal  apprecia- 
t  on  that  ours  is  a  business  country,  with  whose  varied  concerns  they  will  be 
familiar  and  capable  by  their  habits,  instincts,  and  desires  of  giving  such  HS 
s's'ai.ce  as  a  well-conceived  foreign  service  may  render. 

.Vow.  you  are  not  •roing  to  find  men  of  this  sort  full  grown,  like  Jove.  Per- 
haps there  was  a  time  when  our  foreign  representatives,  being  amiable  and  in- 
telligent, were  adequate  to  every  probable  situation.  I  can  recall  the  sign  on 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES.  77 

my  own  door  26  years  ago.  "Office  hours  10  to  12  and  2  to  4,"  and  not  much 
.wing  on  at  that.  It  is  different  now.  I  remember  hearing  Mr.  Page  in  London, 
shortly  after  the  outbreak  of  the  war,  exclaim,  almost  pathetically,  that  his 
predecessors  had  had  a  very  good  time.  "  Of  course,  they  had  a  very  good  time." 
said  he.  "  but  they  had  no  work  to  do."  And  there  you  have  the  key  to  the 
need  of  this  bill.  There  is  work  to  be  done  and  somebody  must  do  it  or  try  to 
do  it,  and  it  is  for  you  to  decide  whether  it  shall  be  well  done  or  indifferently 
done,  or  poorly  done. 

Mr.  Cockran  said  something  a  day  or  two  ago  about  the  old  embassy  on 
Victoria  Street.  I  recall  the  old  embassy  very  well,  four  rooms,  mostly  occu- 
pied by  British  clerks.  It  was  next  door  to  a  shirt  maker's  shop.  The  place 
we  now  occupy  as  our  embassy  in  Grosvenor  Gardens  is  a  different  affair,  a 
large  substantial  building,  and  occupied  by  scores  of  busy  people,  doing  business 
in  a  businesslike  way.  Edward  Everett  was  a  great  minister  to  Great  Britain, 
a  most  charming  man.  Looking  into  my  records  in  London  for  December  16, 
1841,  you  will  find  an  entry  for  that  day  showing  that  Mr.  Everett  returned 
from  Paris  and  received  from  the  consul  general.  Mr.  Aspinwall,  the  archives 
arid  property  of  the  legation;  and  of  what  did  they  consist?  The  property  con- 
sisted of  one  French  cabinet  containing  files,  one  iron  box  containing  letter 
books,  two  bookcases  containing  books,  one  cupboard,  one  division  cupboard,  and 
one  desk.  Please  note  there  was  just  one  desk. 

That  was  the  property  of  the  United  States  Government  in  London  in  1841. 
A  year  later  we  had  our  consul  general  in  London  having  some  trouble  with 
Rothschilds,  who  refused  to  give  credit  to  the  United  States  Government  for 
450  pounds,  about  $3.000.  The  country  has  changed  since  then.  We  do  not 
have  to  go  hat  in  hand  from  Rothschilds  to  Baring  Bros.,  as  he  did.  for  $3,000. 
But  in  the  meantime  our  Diplomatic  Service  has  undergone  little  change  in  the 
method  of  making  appointments  or  the  structure  of  the  service  itself.  Ministers 
and  ambassadors  these  days  are  functionaries,  and  their  success  or  failure 
is  less  a  matter  of  externals  than  it  is  capacity  to  perceive  opportunities  and 
perform  useful  work. 

Some  one  has  suggested  that  we  need  the  successful  business  man  in  these 
foreign  positions,  but  the  successful  business  man  will  not  abandon  his  success, 
and  the  failures  we  do  not  want.  The  dreamers  we  do  not  want.  The  merely 
idle  rich  we  do  not  want.  The  expatriates  we  do  not  want.  What  alternative 
is  there?  There  is  only  one  worth  considering.  Adopt  the  principles  set  out 
in  this  bill.  Select  your  young  material  and  form  it  to  your  purposes.  How? 
fey  sending  it  to  school.  Where?  In  the  consular  establishment.  Give  these 
young  men  to  us.  Where  can  the  future  ambassador  better  learn  the  meaning 
of  treaties  than  in  our  consulates,  where  their  practical  application  is  a  mat- 
ter  of  da  ly  experience?  Where  better  can  he  keep  his  American  spirit  fresh 
than  in  our  offices,  where  we  see  and  touch  from  hour  to  hour  the  vastly  com- 
plicated material  and  moral  life  of  our  own  country?  Where  can  he  learn  to  com- 
prehend rise  processes  of  business  so  well  as  where  the  actual  papers  relating  to 
business  come  rushing  through  the  windows,  demanding  to  be  dealt  with?  Where 
can  he  learn  how  to  protect  the  citizen  in  his  rights  so  well  as  where  the  citi- 
zen comes  to  claim  them?  Where  can  he  learn  to  know  so  much  of  life  in  all 
its  aspects  as  in  our  consulates,  where  we  note  the  births,  read  the  burial  serv- 
ice over  the  dead,  officiate  as  witnesses  at  marriages,  open  wills,  file  claims,  hire 
and  discharge  maritime  laborers,  apply  our  navigation  laws,  carry  on  the  tabu- 
lation of  our  export  statistics  from  hour  to  hour,  deal  with  the  immigrant  who 
leaves  for  our  shores,  be  occasionally  shot  at — as  happened  to  our  consul  at 
Malta  on  Monday  ofthis  week— learn  to  hold  our  tongues  and  control  our  tem- 
pers in  tryins  circumstances? 

\  remark  was  dropped  by  the  acting  chairman  yesterday  about  our  diplo- 
matic secretaries,  or  some  of  them.  He  was  dissatisfied  in  particular  cases. 
It  seems  to  me  that  the  conditions  upon  which  he  touched  are  an  important 
demonstration  of  the  need  of  this  bill.  We  have  said  to  these  young  men  : 
"  You  can  become  secretaries,  you  can  learn  foreign  languages,  you  can  per- 
form the  work  assigned  to  yon.  With  good  luck  you  can  earn  s4.<H>o  a  year, 
but  don't  expect  more.  You  are  not  going  to  be- advanced  to  the  positions 
of  honor  and  responsib:lit> — they  are  reserved  for  gentlemen  from  outside 
wh<.  possess  influence."  The  wonder  is  thiit  so  many  young  men  of  ability 
have  been  found  willing  to  take  up  such  unpromising  situations  in  life. 

Our  consuls  have  slight  immediate  advantages  held  out  to  them  in  this 
'•ill  \«  has  been  pointed  out  by  Mr.  C'nrr.  under  its  terms  they  may  be  shifted 
into  diplomatic  positions  from  time  to  Time,  and  it  will  be  an  excellent  thing 


78  FOREIGN    SERVICE    OF    THE    UNITED    STATES. 

for  the  service  as  a  whole  that  they  can  weave  back  and  forth,  accumulating 
and  applying  the  experience  they  have  gained  in  the  discharge  of  their  duties. 
They,  like  the  diplomatic  secretaries,  may  hope  that  they  will  be  called  upon 
to  serve  at  the  top  of  the  laddder  on  proving  their  ability  to  do  so.  The 
effect  upon  the  morale  of  the  service  will  be  good.  Our  consuls  now  have 
practically  no  chance  of  getting  beyond  the  $8.000  grades.  There  are  only 
two  $12,000  posts,  and  as  four  men  have  occupied  these  posts  since  191X3.  you 
have  an  average  of  one  man  every  four  years  for  these  $12.000  positions. 
That  is  the  best  that  an  American  consul  can  expect  at  the  present  time. 
If  this  bill  should  be  enacted,  you  open  the  door  of  hope  to  them,  at  all  events. 

Another  excellent  thing  for  the  consuls  resulting  from  this  bill  will  be  the 
adjustment  of  salaries,  so  that  hereafter  we  shall  have  no  such  anomalies  as 
consuls  general  receiving  less  compensation  than  the  consuls,  or.  as  in  my  own 
case,  consuls  general  receiving  more  than  most  ministers.  The  relativity  of 
all  the  salaries  under  this  bill  is  correct.  If  you  think  the  basic  scale  too  low 
as  time  goes  on,  you  need  only  to  increase  it  by  such  percentage  as  may  appear 
to  be  just  and  wise. 

The  greatest  thing  that  you  propose  to  do  for  the  consuls  in  the  contemplated 
act  is  to  guarantee  their  future.  Few  consuls  possess  private  means,  and  the 
scale  of  compensation  adopted  prior  to  1914  has  been  cut  in  twr  as  to  purchasing 
power.  Every  consul  in  England  has  seen  his  compensation  reduced  by  20 
per  cent  in  the  last  12  months,  in  line  with  the  rising  exchange.  And  to  these 
well-known  conditions  you  have  provided  by  law  that  consuls  may  not  engage 
in  any  gainful  occupation.  They  may  not  invest  their  savings  in  the  count  ry 
of  their  official  residence,  should  they  have  any  to  invest.  Add  to  that  that 
consuls  necessarily  reside  in  foreign  lands  and  rarely,  after  all,  are  in  places 
that  are  agreeable,  and  often  in  places  that  are  well  known  to  be  unhealthy. 

Mr.  BROWNE.  Could  not  a  consul  send  money  over  and  loan  it  in  this  country? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Undoubtedly  a  consul  can  invest  as  lie  chooses  in  his  own  country. 

Mr.  BROWNE.  But  could  not  over  there? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  The  point  is"  that  the  consul  is  like  any  other  business  man. 
most  likely  to  have  opportunities  to  invest  in  the  place  where  he  happens  to 
reside.  He  is  removed  from  his  own  country,  and  by  the  time  he  learns  of  an 
opportunity  here  the  opportunity  is  gone. 

Mr.  BROWNE.  There  is  no  law  preventing  it.  but  the  opportunities  do  not 
present  themselves  there  as  much? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  No;  there  is  a  definite  rule  under  which  he  is  prohibited  from 
investing  his  savings  in  the  country  of  his  residence.  It  would  be  a  violation  of 
the  regulations  of  the  Department  of  State  for  me  to  buy  a  British  sterling 
bond. 

Clearly,  men  who  have  attained  old  age  in  these  circumstances  must  be 
protected  against  want,  and  I  have  been  deeply  impressed  by  the  generous 
dispositions  of  this  committee  in  dealing  with  that  particular  phase  of  the 
matter.  If  I  may  point  out  one  detail  in  the  bill,  it  is  th's:  Your  bill  provides 
a  retiring  allowance  on  reaching  65  years  of  age  or  complete  disability.  I 
suggest  that  there  may  be  men  who.  having  served  25  or  more  years  con- 
tinuously, may  feel  that  they  wish  to  retire  somewhere,  let  us  say.  between 
the  ages  of  55  and  65.  They  may  wish — it  seems  to  me  a  perfectly  natural 
thing — to  spend  some  years  in  their  own  country  among  their  own  people, 
while  still  physically  sound  and  capable  of  enjoyment,  and  I  suggest  that  on 
a  suitable  showing  to  the  President,  and  with  his  approval,  such  men  might 
be  authorized  to  retire  before  reaching  65  years  of  age,  on  an  allowance  appro 
priate  to  their  length  of  service.  As  the  bill  stands,  a  man  retiring  at  the  age 
of  64  would  receive  nothing,  while  a  colleague  who,  perhaps,  had  actually 
served  fewer  years  would  retire  at  the  age  of  65  on  a  substantial  allowance. 

Mr.  BROWNE.  Does  a  man  under  this  bill  who  has  contributed  and  leaves 
the  service  before  he  is  65.  receive  what  he  has  paid  in? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes.  Every  man  who  separates  from  the  service  before  reach- 
ing the  age  of  retirement  is  reimbursed  the  actual  amount  that  he  has  con- 
tributed, but,  of  course,  the  reimbursement  would  be  a  very  small  affair.  I 
do  not  press  this  point.  I  offer  it  for  your  consideration. 

The  question  has  been  raised  whether  other  Governments  have  anticipated 
us  in  combining  their  diplomatic,  and  consular  branches,  and  I  answer  yes. 
Every  French.  German,  or  Austrian  colleague  I  ever  had  served  later  as  min- 
ister'in  some  part  of  the  world.  I  understand  that  France.  China,  Belgium, 
Japan.  Norway.  Denmark.  Germany,  and  Great  Britain  entirely  or  to  a  degree 
have  unified  their  services  and  made  them  interchangeable.  Great  Britain 


K011KIGX    SKRVICE    OF    THE    UXITKD    STATKS.  79 

goes  further  than  we  propose  to  go  in  this  bill  in  this  respect,  that  she  ap- 
points the  same  individual  at  one  and  the  same  time  to  act  as  a  diplomatic  and 
consular  representative.  Thus,  in  Japan  the  British  ambassador  is  also  the 
consul  general,  and  the  same  is  true  as  to  British  ministers  in  the  following 
countries:  Bolivia,  Bulgaria,  Colombia,  Costa  Rica,  Cuba,  Ethiopia,  Haiti, 
Guatemala.  Honduras,  Nicaragua,  Panama,  Paraguay,  Salvador,  and  Uruguay. 
The  truth  is.  we  live  in  times  when  business  and  diplomacy  go  hand  in  hand. 
You  can  not  keep  business  out  of  the  foreign  service  any  more  than  Mr.  Dick 
could  keep  the  head  of  King  Charles  out  of  his  conversation.  The  British 
have  seen  this,  and  only  a  day  or  two  before  I  left  Ixmdon  the  British  am- 
bassador to  Spain,  in  the  course  of  his  remarks  on  the  occasion  of  the  going 
into  effect  of  a  new  commercial  treaty  with  Spain,  said:  "Diplomatic  servants 
are  occasionally  criticized  by  the  commercial  community.  I  think,  however, 
that  there  is  a  great  change  taking  place  'now  among  the  younger  members 
of  the  service.  They  realize  that  a  greater  part  of  their  work  in  the  future 
will  be  in  connection  with  business  matters  and  they  take  a  serious  interest 
in  these  questions." 

A  member  of  the  committee  asked  Mr.  Carr  the  other  day  in  what  manner 
the  Consular  Service  actually  had  been  improved  by  the  methods  of  selection 
which  have  been  in  effect,  progressively,  since  190G.  I  do  not  know  whether 
you  would  call  the  Americanization  of  the  service  an  improvement,  if  so,  they 
have  accomplished  that.  When  I  went  to  Marseilles  I  was  the  only  American  in 
the  office.  When  I  went  to  Hamburg  it  was  the  same.  During  my  tirst  day  in 
the  Hamburg  office  a  German  gentleman  entered,  one  who  evidently  was  in  the 
habit  of  coming  in  frequently,  and  perceiving  me  occupying  one  of  the  chairs, 
he  leaned  over  to  one  of  our  worthy  German  clerks  and  asked :  "  Who  is  that 
man  sitting  over  there?"  The  clerk  said.  "He  is  the  consul  general."  The 
German  gentleman  said  in  a  surprised  way,  li  He  looks  like  an  American."  The 
clerk  said,  "  Yes;  he  is  an  American." 
Mr.  ROGKKS.  What  year  was  that? 
Mr.  SKI.NNKK.  15)08. 

When  I  went  to  Berlin  there  were  only  two  Americans  there  other  than 
myself.  When  I  came  to  London  there  were  only  three  Americans  other  than 
myself.  Yon  will  find  practically  none  but  Americans  at  those  posts  now.  I 
have  l>3  of  them  in  London,  all  keen,  clean,  wholesome  young  fellows — you 
would  be  glad  to  know  them  anywhere.  Everyone,  I  think,  is  a  college-bred 
man. 

I  am  sorry  that  no  Member  of  Congress  has  ever  inspected  that  office,  because 
I  think  you  would  be  a  little  surprised  to  see  how  varied,  interesting,  and  in- 
structive our  work  is,  and  how  close  it  comes  to  the  real  things  in  our  American 
life.  Just  to  illustrate  how  things  happen.  I  may  mention  that  last  year  we 
sent  a  report  to  Mr.  Carr  about  a  new  method  of  block-letter  handwriting  being 
taught  in  London  schools.  Well,  that  report  was  printed  and  to-day  we  are 
gettintr  letters  from  all  over  this  country  asking  for  particulars.  I  should  not 
be  surprised  if  that  one  little  report  should  be  the  means  of  giving  the  people 
of  this  country  something  they  much  need,  a  handwriting  that  anybody  can 
read.  I  hold  in  my  hand  a  register  of  our  office,  which  I  shall  not  read,  but  it 
may  interest  you  if  I  select  ]>oiiits  from  it  to  show  the  working  organization  of 
an  American  consulate  in  one  of  the  large  commercial  cities  of  the  world. 

To  start  with,  there  is  my  own  particular  office.  You  can  easily  understand 
what  that  work  is — general  supervision,  including  supervisory  Jurisdiction  over 
the  other  consulates  in  the  United  Kingdom.  Now.  we  come  to  a  very  interest- 
ing department,  the  commercial  department.  We  have  here  10  different  em- 
ployees y\>  have  one  employee  who  sits  at  the  telephone  from  9  o'clock  in  the 
morning  until  5  in  the  evening  answering  inquiries  about  the  rates  of  duty  on 
particular  commodities,  customs  administration  laws,  all  sorts  of  commercial 
questions  of  that  kind.  In  this  department  we  carry  on  commercial  corre- 
spondence and  receive  visitors.  In  the  course  of  a  year  thousands  of  commer- 
cial travelers  drop  in  who  want  addresses  and  specific  and  general  information 
of  every  nature. 

During  the  year  ended  June  30.  1922.  in  this  particular  department  there 
were  3.328  written  replies  to  trade  inquiries  sent  out.  Our  office  made  39(5 
trade  reports  of  rather  a  comprehensive  character,  and  we  sent  to  the  Federal 
Reserve  Board  reports  by  cable  every  month  showing  the  fluctuations  in  prices 
of  all  the  staple  commodities.  That  is  a  very  large  work.  We  receive  in  our 


80  FORKKJX  SERVICE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

office  every  first-class  trade  journal  in  the  United  Kingdom  dealing  with  im- 
portant commodities,  and  we  are  in  communication  with  the  various  trade  ex- 
changes which  deal  in  the  same  commodities,  and  in  these  various  ways  we  get 
the  prices  from  day  to  day.  These  prices  are  at  the  command  of  our  manu- 
facturers. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  What  are  the  working  relations  between  the  Department 
of  Commerce  and  the  Consular  Service,  as  being  described  by  you? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  They  are  extremely  friendly. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  What  lines  of  work  do  they  take  up  different  from  the  line 
of  work  that  you  take  up? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  They  do  the  same  things  we  do;  but.  of  course,  we  are  in 
direct  personal  touch  with  the  business  community.  The  actual  commercial 
papers,  under  our  laws,  are  lodged  with  us ;  business  men  come  to  us,  of  neces- 
sity, and  we  have  many  direct  contacts. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  It  has  been  said  that  in  the  consular  service  the  people 
came  to  you  for  information  about  business,  and  in  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce that  the  man  went  after  the  business.  Do  you  know  of  any  such  dis- 
tinction as  that? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Went  after  business  or  went  after  information? 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  Went  alter  business  for  this  country.  It  was  mentioned 
that  the  landing  of  a  contract  for  a  telephone  exchange  was  secured  in  central 
Nicaragua  or  one  of  the  South  American  countries. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  It  may  be  the  case  that  in  certain  circumstances  an  American 
public  officer  has  succeeded  in  selling  goods,  but  it  is  most  unusual,  and  it  is 
certainly  not  the  function  of  such  officers  to  replace  the  business  man.  As 
practical  professional  and  business  men  yourselves  you  know  without  my 
telling  you  that  when  a  steel  manufacturer  wants  to  sell  steel  he  looks  for 
(he  man  who  ordinarily  buys  steel,  and  he  sells  it  himself.  A  public  officer  can 
assist  in  these  transactions.  Occasionally  special  knowledge  may  come  to  him 
whereby  a  purchase  and  sale  takes  place  which  otherwise  would  have  passed 
to  another  country.  But,  in  the  last  analys  s.  the  business  man  himself  carries 
on  his  own  business  for  obvious  reasons.  What  we  aim  to  do  is  to  inform 
business  men  of  existing  opportunities,  to  suggest  the  conditions  under  which 
business  can  be  carried  on,  to  support  legitimate  efforts  of  a  commercial 
character,  and  to  defend  commercial  interests  when  threatened  by  adverse 
influences;  but  I  do  not  conceive  it  to  be  the  function  of  the  public  officer 
actually  to  substitute  himself  for  the  business  man. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  Do  the  Department  of  Commerce  men  maintain  a  separate 
establishment  and  offices  in  London  just  as  your  Consular  Service  does? 

Mr.  SKIN  NEB.  Yes.  The  representatives  of  the  Department  of  Commerce 
have  an  organization  of  their  own.  They  receive  visitors,  answer  letters,  and 
prepare  reports  as  we  do. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  Why  could  not  the  Consular  Service  be  sufficiently  extended 
or  given  sufficient  power  to  carry  out  all  the  work  that  the  Department  of 
Commerce  is  doing,  dual  work  that  they  are  attempting? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  That  is  for  Congress  to  decide.  We  have  been  doing  this 
work  for  many  years,  and  we  require  no  additional  powers. 

Mr.  MOORE.  As  I  understand,  Mr.  Linthicum  has  in  mind  the  possible  con- 
solidation of  those  two  independent  services,  to  avoid  duplication? 

Mr.  SKINNEB.  There  is  undoubtedly  duplication.  There  is,  of  course,  no  reason 
why  we  should  not  do  everything  that  is  necessary  to  be  done.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  we  are  two  organizations  occupying  the  same  Held. 

Mr.  COLE.  Does  the  Department  of  Agriculture  have  representatives  over 
there? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes;  the  Department  of  Agriculture  has  a  representative  in 
London  who  reports  on  markets,  a  very  capable  young  man.  This  work  is 
also  a  duplication  of  work  carried  on  in  the  Consular  Service.  The  Federal 
Reserve  Board  at  one  time  proposed  having  a  separate  office  in  London  to  report 
on  market  conditions,  too.  but.  as  that  would  have  involved  the  employment 
of  a  very  considerable  staff  and  a  substantial  outlay  of  money,  it  was  decided 
to  intrust  the  work  to  the  consul  genera!,  and  we  do  it  all  with  the  assistance 
of  one  extra  clerk.  If  you  will  examine  the  office  register  which  I  hold  in 
my  hand  you  will  see  that  our  organization  is  susceptible  of  being  expanded 
in  any  direction  to  meet  any  requirement.  All  that  we  need  to  do  if  con- 
fronted by  some  new  requirement  is  to  increase  the  resources  of  an  existing 
division  or.  perhaps,  to  set  up  an  entirely  new  division.  The  work  that  we 
are  now  doing  includes  duties  on  behalf 'of  the  Departments  of  State.  Com- 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  81 

iherce.  Labor,  Navy,  War.  Agriculture.  Justice,  and  Treasury,  or  the  bureaus 
under  those  departments.  We  also  act  for  the  government  of  the  Philippine 
Islands  and  the  Panama  Canal  administration.  I  do  not  wish  to  give  you  nn 
exaggerated  idea  of  this  representation  of  other  departments.  In  some  respects 
the  work  is  regular  and  very  voluminous,  especially  for  the  Treasury  Depart- 
ment and  the  Department  of  Commerce,  but  in  other  instances  our  duties  are 
light  and  more  or  less  intermittent. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Before  you  resume  your  tabulation  of  your  office  force,  in  the 
first  place,  how  many  years  does  your  recollection  in  the  service  cover? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  About  26  years. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  How  many  instances  do  you  recall  whefe  a  constd  or  consul 
general  has  been  promoted  to  be  ambassador  or  minister  from  his  consular 
post  ? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  The  only  case  that  I  recall  at  this  moment  is  that  of  Mr. 
Bowen,  who  was  promoted  to  be  minister  in  Persia  from  Barcelona,  and  fol- 
lowing that  was  transferred  to  Venezuela.  Mr.  Root  at  one  time  asked  me 
to  go  to  Persia  as  minister,  but  I  did  not  go.  I  surmise  there  have  been  other 
cases. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  The  only  one  that  occurs  to  you  in  a  quarter  of  a  century  is 
the  case  you  have  given. 

Mr.  MOORES.  Was  Mr.  Shuster  in  the  Consular  Service? 
Mr.  SKINNEB.  I  think  not. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  There  is  one  other  question,  and  we  will  see  whether  or  not  it  is 
a  matter  that  should  remain  in  the  record.  One  of  the  most  intolerable  things- 
that  I  have  come  across  in  connection  with  inquiries  into  the  foreign  service 
is  the  fact  that  some  of  the  little  secretaries  who  have  the  background  of  a 
social  position  and  money  have  the  effrontery  to  look  down  upon  the  Consular 
Service  and  on  big  men  in  the  Consular  Service  who  have  grown  distinguished 
and  experienced  in  that  work. 

Is  it  your  experience.  Mr.  Skinner,  and  you  can  answer  this  off  or  on  the 
record,  that  there  is  a  considerable  amount  of  that  petty  snobbery  on  the  part 
of  the  Diplomatic  Service  as  regards  the  Consular  Service,  and  is  it  further 
your  impression  that  in  so  far  as  it  exists  the  present  bill  would  assist  in 
removing  that  condition? 

Mr.  SKINNKK.  Well.  Mr.  Chairman.  I  have  numerous  friends  among  those 
secretaries,  and  many  of  them  are  ambitious,  efficient,  able,  and  attractive 
young  fellows.  This  snobbery  that  you  describe  undoubtedly  does  exist  and 
has  existed,  but  it  is  by  means  invariably  so.  The  personal  weaknesses  to 
which  you  allude  seem  to  me  to  be  the  almost  inevitable  consequence  of  a  defec- 
liw  system.  The  really  serious  men  among  the  secretaries  deplore  the  mani- 
festations you  describe  and  avoid  them  themselves. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  do  not  at  all  suggest  that  the  condition  of  which  I  speak  is 
universal  or  even  general.  But  I  fear  it  is  at  least  occasionally  found.  My 
own  belief  is  that,  considering  the  defects  in  our  system,  our  corps  of  secre- 
taries is.  on  the  whole,  remarkably  efficient. 

Mr.  LINTHICVM.  Coming  back  to  the  question  of  commercial  attaches,  are 
they  housed  in  the  embassy  building? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes. 

Mr.  LINTHKTM.  When  inquiries  are  made,  what  line  of  inquiries  is  desig- 
nated to  them  for  attention? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  am  not  familiar  with  the  rules  of  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce. We  operate  separately  and  distinctly.  We  know  nothing  of  their 
operations  in  detail,  except  as  we  learn  of  them  by  means  of  social  intercourse 
and  such  casual  information  as  may  drift  in  to  us. 

Mr.  Li.vmict "M.  How  many  employees  are  under  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce in  London  in  connection  with  commercial  attaches? 

Mr.  SKIN  NEK.  My  recollection  is  that  there  may  be  about  a  do/en.  I  could 
not  say  positively — something  like  that. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Xo\v.  you  may  go  on  with  your  statement. 

Mr.  SKINNKK.  1  bad  spoken  of  our  general  department  and  the  commercial 
department.  We  have  a  shipping  department.  The  shipping  department  is 
one  of  the  most  interesting  branches  of  our  work  at  the  present  time,  in 'view 
of  the  irmit  interest  taken  in  the  mercantile  marine.  We  have  six  employees 
in  it.  also  a  surgeon  of  the  United  States  Public  Health  Service.  In  this  depart- 
ment the  clearance  of  vessels,  shipment  and  discharge  of  seamen,  execution  of 
quarantine  laws,  checking  of  alien  passports.  correspondence  relating  to  ship- 
ping matters,  and  consular  reports  on  the  same  subject  are  handled.  During 


82  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

the  year  ending  June  30.  1922.  we  issued  040  bills  of  health  in  London.  That 
means  640  different  ships  went  to  the  United  States  ;  the  quarantine  officer  looked 
after  the  health  of  640  vessels,  and  all  sorts  of  operations  in  connection  wiltli 
those  ships. 

Mr.  COLE.  Those  were  American  vessels? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  No;  vessels  of  all  descriptions.  In  the  same  manner  we  cleans  1 
232  American  vessels,  a  very  different  matter.  We  received  ±28  marine  notes 
of  protest,  which,  of  course,  related  to  an  infinite  variety  of  casualties,  minor 
and  important.  We  shipped  364  seamen,  discharged  210.  looked  after  4  who- 
died,  relieved  112,  and  vised  582  crew  lists  relating  to  several  thousand  men. 

That  is  a  very  cold  statement  about  a  branch  of  our  work  that  is  really 
wonderfully  interesting.  We  receive  Yankee  skippers  every  day.  and  it  is 
really  inspiring  to  see  them.  Not  very  long  ago  a  ship  came  in,  owned  by  the 
captain  and  the  watch  officers.  They  had  reverted  to  the  old-fashioned"  way 
when  the  captain  owned  the  ship. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  A  sailing  ship? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes. 

Mr.  MOORE.  Tramp? 

Mr.  SKIN  NEB.  Yes. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  All  sailing  ships  are  tramps. 

Mr.  SKINNEB.  The  most  of  our  vessels  that  come  into  London  are  tramps. 
But  we  have  also  first-class  American  passenger  ships  that  come  into  London, 
ships  of  over  10,000  tons,  mostly  one-cabin  ships  on  which  the  fare  is  but  si'*' 
and  they  are  sailing  full. 

Mr.  FISH.  What  kind— steamships? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  They  are  vessels  of  the  United  States  Lines. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  Is  that  a  privately  owned  corporation. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  They  are  ships  owned  by  the  United  States  Government. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  I  suppose  you  can  not  tell  us  whether  that  $100  covers  the- 
cost  of  the  service,  or  whether  there  is  something  supplied  by  taxation. 

.Mr.  SKINNER.  I  understand  those  particular  liners  much  more  than  carry 
their  own  operating  expenses.  They  appear  to  be  doing  well  and  are  very 
jtopular  with  the  public. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Passage  at  $100? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes;  about  that.  The  whole  mercantile  fleet  of  the  world 
was  built  up  on  the  proposition  that  immigrants  should  be  carried  for  from 
$25  to  $40.  The  money  in  shipping  is  to  be  found  in  carrying  numbers  at 
comparatively  low  prices.  I  think  our  people  are  pursuing  a  wise  policy  in 
providing  what  are  called  "cabin  ships''  on  which  lares  can  be  obtained  at 
quite  moderate  prices. 

Then  we  come  to  the  American  citizenship  department.  Here  we  have  five- 
employees.  Here  we  grant  emergency  passports,  take  applications  for  depart- 
mental passports  and  consular  certificates,  register  births,  and  handle  the  mani- 
fold correspondence  arising  out  of  that.  In  connection  with  that  we  deal  with 
the  law  of  citizenship,  and  have  a  great  many  cases  of  expatriation,  and  all 
sorts  of  legal  problems.  As  I  was  saying  before  some  of  the  Members  came  in, 
it  Is  in  working  out  those  problems  that  the  future  diplomat  should  get  a  better 
practical  knowledge  of  what  he  is  to  do  in  the  higher  regions  of  the  service 
than  anywhere  else.  In  this  department,  in  the  last  fiscal  year,  we  either 
extended  or  amended  4,371  passports;  we  granted  999  passports  and  we  re- 
ceived 1,117  applications  for  new  passports;  reported  43  births  and  160  re_'i> 
trations.  This  is  a  very  dull  statement  but  it  represents  a  great  deal  of  work. 

Then  we  come  to  the  alien  vise  department.  You  hear  H  great  deal  about 
that  in  the  United  States  at  present.  Here  we  see  all  aliens  proceeding  to  this 
country.  We  have  eight  employees  in  this  department.  We  pass  U|xm  the 
suitability  of  every  immigrant  proceeding  to  the  I'nited  States,  and  that  meau> 
a  face-to-face  inquiry  into  the  various  circumstances  of  his  life. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  How  effective  do  you  think  that  inspection  is? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  think  that  the  inspection  is  most  useful.  I  have  not  t he- 
slightest  doubt  that  the  proper  working  of  our  immigration  laws  requires  that 
the  vise  shall  be  granted  at  the  place  of  departure.  It  seems  to  me  very  unfair 
to  the  individual  to  let  him  dose  out  his  home,  invest  his  money  in  steamship 
tickets,  and  go  through  all  the  heart-breaking  process  of  getting  off  to  New 
York,  remain  there  two  weeks,  ami  he  turned  hack,  when  you  might  just  as  well 
turn  him  hack  on  the  other  side. 

Mr.  COI.E.  You  fill  out  his  papers? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE    OF    THK    UNITED    STATES.  83 

'Hit-  CHAIRMAN.  The  service  in  this  respect  has  been  developed  during  the 
lust  three  or  four  years,  lias  it  not'.- 

Mr.  SKINNER.   Yes. 

The  ('if AIRMAN.  1  will  say  for  your  information.  Mr.  Cole,  that  when  we 
increased  the  vise  fee  Mr.  Carr  gave  orders  to  all  of  our  representatives 
abroad  to  make  these  investigations  of  alien's  viseing  papers  in  the  interest  of 
fairness,  as  Mr.  Skinner  suggests. 

Mr.  TKMPI.E.  Of  course,  these  investigations  do  not  take  the  place  of  the 
investigation  by  the  immigration  authorities  after  they  arrive  at  an  American 
port  ? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  No. 

Mr.  SKINNKR.  The  whole  thing  is  defective.  There  is  really  something  absurd 
about  it.  You  would  suppose  that  in  the  case  of  an  immigrant  going  to  an 
American  consul  for  a  vise  he  would  ask  whether  he  might  go  to  the  United 
States,  and  that  the  consul  would  say  you  may  go  or  you  may  not  go.  It  is 
in  reality  the  other  way  around.  When  the  immigrant  comes  to  us  we  look  him 
over  and  say.  perhaps:  "You  are  not  a  suitable  person  to  have  a  vise,  and 
you  will  be  rejected  when  you  get  to  New  York.  We  warn  you  not  to  go."  He 
says  in  effect:  l-I  know  all  that,  but  I  care  nothing  about  your  warning:  you 
have  u'ot  to  give  me  my  vise  and  I  am  going."  And  we  do  have  to  give  him  his 
papers.  He  anticipates  being  able  to  break  down  the  legal  objections  to  his 
admission  through  pressure  exerted  by  his  friends  ami  relatives  after  landing. 

Mr.  Fisir.  Why  is  it  compulsorvV  Can  you  not  use  discretion  about  granting 
a  vise? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Our  powers  are  limited  because  the  law,  as  it  stands,  requires 
that  the  eligibility  of  the  alien  to  enter  the  United  States  shall  be  determined 
only  upon  the  actual  arrival  of  the  alien  in  the  territory  of  the  United  States. 

Mr.  FISH.  Is  it  not  time  we  made  some  law  suitable  to  change  that? 

Mr.  MOOUKS.  The  President  in  a  message  the  other  day  said  so. 

Mr.  FISH.  Only  yesterday  I  was  notified  by  one  of  my  constituents  whose 
relative  had  arrived  and  been  declared  insane.  Had  he  received  a  vise1  from 
the  State  Department  on  the  other  side? 

Mr.  SKIXXET:.  He  undoubtedly  received  a  vis£. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  You  would  not  grant  the  vise"  if  you  knew  the  man  was  insane? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  might  be  compelled  to  do  so.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  in  certain 
extreme  cases  I  have  taken  the  liberty  of  actually  refusing,  but  only  very 
exceptional  circumstances  would  warrant  that. 

Mr.  MOOKKS.  Have  you  an  alienist  or  psychological  expert  attached  to  the 
corps? 

Mr.  SKINNKR.  Yes;  we  have  a  Public  Health  Service  surgeon.  We  could 
perfect  our  administration  and  undoubtedly  would  if  we  had  proper  legal 
powers.  However,  even  as  matters  now  stand  we  clear  up  a  great  many  bad 

The  flagrant  cases  come  to  us.  and.  of  course,  we  advise  them  not  to  go, 

and  if  they  are  sensible  they  act  upon  our  advice.  But  in  many  other  ftstances 
they  do  go. 

Mr.  TKMPI.K.  I  ran  into  a  number  of  cases  in  which  a  diplomatic  officer  has 
absolutely  refused  to  grant  vise. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  We  can  refuse  in  the  case  of  an  anarchist,  for  example,  but 
those  cases  are  extremely  rare.  We  also  refuse  to  act  when  the  quota  of  a 
country  is  exhausted.  The  numerous  cases  are  what  we  call  immigration  cases. 
where  a  man  may  be  unfit,  liable  to  become  a  public  charge,  a  contract  laborer. 
and  so  on. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  Are  the  regulations  in  Great  Britain,  controlling  the  action  of 
American  consuls  in  I'ritish  territory,  the  same  as  are  in  force  in  Poland? 

Mr.  SKIXNKR.  Yes:  the  regulations  Are  identical. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  Refusals  sire  much  more  common  in  Poland  and  some  portions 
of  Austria-Hungary.  I  have  a  large  proportion  of  foreigners  in  my  district. 
and  then-  is  hardly  a  day  goes  by  but  their  friends  write  to  me. 

Mr.  SKINMH.   I'.cc.-nisc  in  those  countries  the  quota  law  comes  into  effect. 

Mr.  FISH.  What  authority  have  you  got  over  the  quota  law? 

Mr.  SKINNKR.  We  are  directed  in  all  cases  where  the  quota  is  exhausted  to 
•  •ease  u'rantina  further  vises. 

Mr.  FISH.  That  is  how  they  find  out  that  the  quota  is  exhausted? 

Mr.  SKINNKU.  That   is  usually  the  first  information  they  get. 

Mr.  FISH.  I  want  to  know  whether  an  amendment  could  be  put  into  the  bill  : 
that  is.  to  include  an  amendment  giving  preference  under  the  8  per  cent  con- 


84  FOREIGN    SERVICE    OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

dition  to  the  immediate  relatives  of  ex-service  men?  Do  those  relatives  -jet 
preference  ? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  They  undoubtedly  would.  That  matter  does  not  arise  prac- 
tically in  Great  Britain  because  the  quota  riever  has  been  exhausted. 

Mr.  FISH.  You  are  not  prepared  to  give  the  figures? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  am  prepared  to  say  that  77.000  of  British-born  persons  may 
go  from  Great  Britain. 

Mr.  COCKKAN.  Does  that  include  the  Irish  and  the  Scotch? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes ;  I  should  use  the  term  United  Kingdom.  Only  40  000,  ap- 
proximately, went  last  year.  The  old  type  of  British  immigrant  does  not  go. 
It  is  the  city  men  who  are  going  now. 

Mr.  FISH.  Coming  over  now,  due  to  the  unemployment  situation? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes ;  it  is  unemployment  in  Great  Britain  that  is  driving  a  great 
many  to  the  United  States,  but  the  British  farmer  does  not  come. 

Mr.  P'ISH.  You  are  not  prepared  to  say  about  the  preference  I  mentioned? 
You  do  not  know  how  it  works. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  There  is  no  reason  why  it  should  be  difficult  to  grant  the 
preferential  consideration  contemplated  in  the  law.  The  matter  does  nor  affect 
us  in  Great  Britain,  as  the  quota  has  never  been  exhausted  in  that  country. 

Mr.  CONNALLY.  Is  not  the  practical  difficulty  about  setting  up  examining  agen- 
cies in  foreign  countries,  or  most  foreign  countries,  the  objection  of  foreign 
Governments  to  our  setting  up  immigration  agencies  on  their  own  soil? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  read  a  statement  to  that  effect  in  the  hearings  of  the  House 
Committee  on  Immigration,  emanating,  if  I  recall  correctly,  from  the  Italian 
Embassy.  They  made  certain  objections.  But  I  believe  that  if  the  matter 
were  presented  adequately  to  these  foreign  powers  they  would  be  quite  agree- 
able to  action  being  taken  abroad,  because  it  would  be  much  better  for  their 
own  people.  It  is  their  own  people  who  suffer.  I  know  that  the  British  Gov- 
ernment rather  objects  to  the  fact  that  we  now  grant  vises  which  carry  with 
them  no  right  of  admission.  They  say  that  they  are  perfectly  willing  to  have 
us  pass  on  the  admissibility  of  people  in  the  United  Kingdom  and  would  prei'er 
us  to  do  it  rather  than  to  have  them  come  over  and  then  be  turned  back. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  Was  it  not  in  connection  with  medical  examination  that  the 
Italian  Government  objected  to  the  exercise  of  American  jurisdiction  within 
Italian  territory? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  The  letter  as  written  indicated  that  they  considered  the  sugges- 
tion as  a  proposal  to  exercise  extra  territorial  sovereignty. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  arose  in  connection  with  medical  examina- 
tions. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  It  may  be  so. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  advantage  is  there  in  having  the  vises  if  \.>u  ha\v 
no  discretionary  power?  For  instance,  an  alien  presents  himself  who  is  n 
victim  of  glaucoma,  an  excludable  disease,  and  it  is  perfectly  obvious  he  suffers 
from  thjt? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Have  you  not  the  power,  without  assigning  any  reason.  10 
refuse  to  vise  his  passports? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  We  have  not  the  power.  Under  the  regulations  we  advise  hiai 
not  to  go;  if  he.  nevertheless,  insists  upon  going,  we  inform  the  immigration 
people  on  the  other  side.  We  endeavor  to  get  a  report  to  Xew  York  or  else- 
where prior  to  the  arrival  of  that  individual,  and  then  he  may  be  excluded. 
The  trouble  is  that  once  the  unfit  alien  has  landed  in  America  all  sorts  of 
pressure  is  applied  to  overcome  the  reasons  for  his  rejection.  We  had  rather 
a  notorious  case  a  few  days  ago  of  a  young  girl  who  was.  invited  to  proceed 
to  the  United  States  by  a  British  actor  in  Xew  York,  who  \vas  a  married  man. 
This  girl  went.  We  cabled  over  and  reported  the  facts.  She  was  met  as  the 
steamer  came  in.  was  not  allowed  to  land,  was  turned  hack,  and  her  parents 
were  overjoyed  that  she  was  saved  from  the  fate  which  awaited  her.  Such 
cases  are  arising  all  the  time.  It  can  not  be  doubted  that  the  vise  system. 
even  though  imperfect,  yields  very  valuable  results. 

That  summarizes  the  subject  of  the  alien  vise.  Next  is  the  accounting  de- 
partment of  our  organization,  where  we  take  in  the  money.  Here  \ve  have  eight 
employees.  During  the  year  ended  June  30,  1022.  we  dealt  with  :">7..~54  consular 
invoices.  That  represented,  you  might  say.  about  half  of  all  the  British  goods 
that  entered  the  United  States.  Of  course,  there  is  a  great  deal  of  work  con- 
nected with  that. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  What  is  that  figure  again? 

Mr.  SKINNER,  There  were  37,554  separate  shipments. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED  STATES.  85 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Separate  shipments  or  separate  invoices?  Have  you  got  the 
amounts? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  have  that  separately. 

Mr.  MOOKES.  This  statement  will  be  in  the  record. 

Mr.  LINTHICUM.  How  many  employees  are  in  your  office? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  We  have  55. 

Then  we  come  to  our  notarial  department.  Here  we  have  only  two  em- 
ployees. We  take  depositions  and  perform  notarial  services  of  a  varied  kind 
and  carry  on  the  correspondence  arising  therefrom.  During  the  year  ended 
June  30.  1922.  this  department  performed  8.270  separate  services.  That  cov- 
ered every  activity  that  a  man  might  conceivably  think  of. 

Then  we  come  to  our  war  claims  department.  I  suppose  that  in  no  other 
consulate  in  the  world  is  there  such  a  department  as  a  war  claims  department. 
That  is  a  product  of  the  war.  We  have  here  three  employees.  From  the 
beginning  of  the  war,  we  have  made  up  the  record  of  every  claim  of  com- 
mercial character  for  seized  goods,  seized  ships,  etc.  We  have  followed  the 
cases  through,  representing  many  of  these  claimants  in  the  courts,  and  have 
collected  hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars  for  different  people.  WTe  have 
collected,  incidentally,  the  whole  prize  court  history  of  the  war,  having  classi- 
fied every  prize  court  judgment  that  has  been  handed  down.  I  do  not  know 
whether  that  will  serve  anybody  in  the  future,  but  we  thought  that  something 
might  arise  when  the  concrete  commercial  history  of  the  war  as  distinguished 
from  the  broader  aspects  of  it  might  be  of  utility. 

Then  we  come  to  the  filing,  mailing,  and  statistical  department. 

Mr.  MOORES.  Is  your  prize  court  material  in  such  shape  that  it  could  be 
published ;  and,  if  so,  how  much  of  a  report  would  it  make? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  There  is  an  enormous  volume  of  material,  but  it  is  all  concrete 
and  deals  with  particular  claims,  the  history  of  each  particular  claim.  Of 
course,  the  prize  court  jurisprudence  is  interwoven  through  this  material. 

Mr.  MOORES.  I  imagine  it  would  be  of  immense  value. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  hope  there  will  never  be  a  war  that  might  cause  it  to  be 
referred  to.  WTe  dealt  with  thousands  of  cases  during  the  war.  The  British 
Government  took  the  position  that  they  would  not  decide  certain  matters  until 
the  claimant  had  exhausted  his  legal  remedies.  There  were  thousands  of 
cases  in  which  the  claimant  was  absent  from  the  scene  or  too  poor  or  something 
of  that  sort.  He  could  not  go  to  the  expense  of  hiring  lawyers  and  pushing  it 
through  in  the  usual  way.  So  we  got  an  arrangement  with  the  president  of  the 
prize  court  by  which  we,  as  consular  officers,  might  enter  appearance  on  behalf 
of  the  claimant  and  so  get  a  decision  without  any  expense  on  his  part.  We 
dealt  with  a  great  many  cases  of  that  kind. 

Mr.  BROWNE.  Who  presides  over  these  prize  courts? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  He  is  called  the  president  of  the  prize  court. 

Mr.  BROWNE.  Is  he  under  the  consular  department? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  thought  you  meant  the  British  officer.  Vice  Consul  De  Vault 
happens  to  be  the  present  head  of  our  war  claims  department. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  The  cases  are  tried  in  the  regular  court? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes.  But,  as  you  can  well  understand,  there  is  more  done 
outside  of  court  than  inside  by  private  representation,  negotiation,  etc. 

In  our  statistical  department  we  follow  the  movement  of  exports  from  the 
United  Kingdom  to  the  United  States.  At  any  moment  of  the  day  we  can  tell 
you  the  value  of  wool  or  any  other  commodity  that  has  been  exported  as 
represented  in  our  invoices.  In  this  department  is  also  handled  the  outgoing 
correspondence.  During  the  year  ended  June  30.  1922.  we  sent  out  43.208 
letters  from  our  office.  In  .the  same  time  903  instructions  were  received  from 
the  Department  of  State  and  we  sent  out  1.732  dispatches  or  formal  reports. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Can  you  give  us  the  amount  of  these  37.000  invoices?  What 
do  they  aggregate  in  the  year? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  For  the  11  months  of  1922  the  aggregate  exports  from  London 
to  the  United  States  reached  29,663.287  pounds  plus  $8.924.681.  Some  of  our 
invoices  are  expressed  in  pounds,  some  in  dollars,  and  on  account  of  the  vary- 
ing rates  of  exchange  we  are  embarrassed  because  you  can  not  reduce  those 
pounds  to  dollars  and  get  a  fair  statement  of  the  facts,  so  we  follow  the 
practice  of  expressing  our  statistics  in  the  currency  in  the  invoices  as  stated. 

Mr.  ('(><  KI:AN.  So  that  your  actual  invoices  for  the  11  months  of  1922  covered 
$160,000,000. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes;  about  that  figure.  That  is  a  considerable  increase  over 
previous  year.  1921.  the  total  for  11  months  of  which  was  £13,761.806. 


86  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

In  1920  the  total  was  £."U.o55.536.  Tin-  reason  tin-  figures  are  low  now  is 
because  values  have  come  clown  greatly.  You  may  be  interested  to  know  that 
thus  far  this  year  the  value  of  precious  stones  exported  from  London  amounts 
to  £2,975,646. 

Mr.  MOORES.  Imported  to  this  country? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  From  London  alone. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  To  what  extent  do  you  in  that  office  exercise  scrutiny  of  each 
of  those  397,000  invoices  that  covered  a  value  of  $160.000.000?  How  much 
actual  intervention  by  the  consul,  how  much  supervision  or  scrutiny  does  the 
consul  exercise? 

Mr.  COLE.  In  other  words,  do  you  know  that  every  invoice  is  honestly  made? 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  Just  what  you  have  to  do  with  it? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  We  act  as  auditors,  to  see  that  the  invoice  is  technically  correct. 
We  do  not  often  go  into  the  material  facts,  because  we  have  another  organiza- 
tion that  assists  us  in  determining  values.  If  we  suspect  that  a  certain  line  of 
invoices  requires  inquiry,  the  Treasury  attache,  who  comes  in  every  day,  is 
consulted.  We  say  to  him:  "You  would  better  <ro  down  and  see  those  people 
and  investigate  this  ease."  Then  he  will  take  it  up  in  detail.  It  may  happen 
that  in  the  development  of  a  case  we  can  assist  him,  and  we  certainly  work  very 
closely  together.  That  is  true  of  London,  and  no  doubt  also  true  of  Paris, 
where  they  have  this  Treasury  organization.  In  smaller  places  where  I  have 
been  we  made  actual  inquiry  as  to  each  invoice. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  In  the  consular  office? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes.  Of  course,  we  only  go  into  the  cases  where  the  goods  are 
dutiable.  In  the  case  of  free  goods,  it  is  only  a  matter  of  statistics. 

Mr.  MOORES.  Do  you  find  many  cases  of  undervaluation? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Not  many  cases  of  deliberate  undervaluation.  But  frequently 
the  overseas  price  differed  from  the  domestic  price.  Those  are  the  things  that 
arise. 

Mr.  COLE.  What  portion  of  this  $160.000,000  exports  from  London  were  duti- 
able? Have  you  the  figures  on  that? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  could  not  say  positively  but  possibly  about  one-half. 

To  return  to  this  bill  I  do  not  think  you  can  miss  an  institution  that  y:>u  have 
never  known,  and  as  the  people  of  the  LTnited  States  have  possessed  only  a  rudi- 
mentary and  unbalanced  foreign  service  they  can  not  very  well  anticipate  the 
many  advantages  which,  from  my  point  of  view,  will  ensue  upon  the  passage  of 
this  bill.  I  can  only  assure  you  of  my  own  knowledge  that  all  over  the  world 
young  men  full  of  promise  are  at  their  tasks  to-day  buoyed  up  by  the  confident 
expectation  that  this  bill  so  necessary  for  the  protection  of  our  trade  and  com- 
merce, so  indispensable  for  the  furtherance  of  our  political  relations,  will  pass. 
I  earnestly  hope  for  the  sake  of  our  country's  business  interests  that  you  will 
not  allow  the  measure  to  fail. 

That  is  really  all  that  I  have  to  say.     I  should  like  to  answer  any  questions. 

Mr.  CONNALLY.  Your  statement  in  conclusion  was  to  the  effect  that  the  coun- 
try did  not  know  much  about  the  foreign  service :  that  it  was  unbalanced,  etc. 
What  is  the  matter  with  our  foreign  service?  Is  it  so  serious? 

Mr.  COLE.  What  is  the  matter  with  it? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  It  lacks  stability ;  it  lacks  unification :  it  lacks  special  training 
among  the  higher  diplomatic  officers  where  such  training  and  experience  are 
most  necessary.  It  is  not  properly  housed,  and  in  the  higher  diplomatic  offices 
the  rate  of  pay  is  such  that  only  rich  men  can  accept  the  positions. 

Mr.  CONNALLY.  As  compared  with  other  foreisrn  services,  is  ours  at  the  foot 
of  the  list? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  The  material  in  our  service  I  believe  to  be  as  pood  as  any.  but 
the  organization  is  defective,  and  unless  we  ameliorate  conditions  of  employ- 
ment I  do  not  believe  that  we  can  hold  together  the  best  of  our  present  per- 
sonnel. Our  men  are  waiting  now  for  the  enactment  of  the  proposals  you  have 
before  you.  Let  us  look  at  the  Consular  Service:  As  I  said  a  moment  ago.  be- 
fore a  number  of  members  had  come  in.  there  are  only  two  positions  that  pay 
$12,000.  Since  1906  four  men  have  occupied  these  two  posts.  ;m<l  two  of  them, 
including  myself,  are  still  in  office.  So  that  worked  out  mathematically  there 
is  less  than  one  chance  in  every  four  years  for  400  men  to  get  into  one  of  these 
offices.  You  can  not  expect  competent  and  ambitious  young  men  to  be  con- 
tented indefinitely  with  conditions  in  which  there  are  only  two  positions  of 
outstanding  attractiveness,  from  a  financial  point  of  view  at  all  events,  to  which 
they  can  aspire.  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  4<>  per  cent  of  the  members  of 
the  Consular  Service  to-dav  could  enter  the  business  world  and  command 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  87 

salaries  or  compensation  miming  into  very  large  figures.  Mr.  Carr  has  told 
you  that  we  are  losing  some  of  our  best  material — young  men  who  do  not  feel 
that  they  can  wait  for  remedial  legislation.  We  lost  one  such  man  about  two 
months  ago.  I  understand  that  he  is  making  $20,000  a  year  to-day  and  has 
brilliant  financial  prospects.  We  shall  lose  another  young  man  in  about  two 
weeks,  one  who  does  not  want  to  go  but  whose  circumstances  are  such  that  he 
really  has  no  choice  in  the  matter. 

Mr.  CONNALLY.  If  we  have  that  quality  of  young  men,  then  they  are  not  get- 
ting the  salaries  to  which  they  are  entitled. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Men  are  giving  up  their  lives  to  this  service  because  they  are 
attracted  to  it  for  various  reasons,  and  they  do  not  expect  the  financial  rewards 
offered  in  private  business:  but  on  the  other  hand,  the  most  of  them  have 
families  to  consider  and  there  conies  a  point  where  the  bread  and  butter 
problem  is  the  controlling  factor. 

Mr.  CONNALLY.  To  be  sure. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  But  if  you  can  assure  them  a  livelihood,  the  oppor.un'ty  to 
carry  on  their  duties  in  suitable  comfort,  if  you  can  hold  out  advancement  t<r 
them  from  time  to  time,  while  also  granting  them  retirement  allowances,  so> 
that  they  may  be  relieved  of  the  anxieties  which  now  beset  so  many  of  them, 
you  will  have  provided  such  incentives  to  good  work  as  to  hold  them  in  the 
service  and  to  develop  their  most  useful  qualities. 

Mr.  CONN  ALLY.  You  speak  of  stability.  Is  the  Consular  Service  not  now 
under  civil  service  rules?  Are  they  not  all  permanent  positions? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes. 

Mr.  CONNALLY.  How  are  you  going  to  make  it  more  stable  and  permanent? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  We  have  stability  in  the  Consular  Service,  as  you  suggest.  We 
are  now  working  for  something  more.  We  hope  that  by  unifying  the  two 
services,  by  promoting  interchangeability  in  the  manner  and  for  the  purposes 
already  explained  to  you  we  shall  have,  in  the  course  of  time,  such  a  body  of 
trained  men  that  Presidents  in  future  years,  for  their  own  convenience  and  in 
their  own  interest,  will  prefer,  in  making  the  appointments  to  the  higher 
diplomatic  offices,  to  turn  to  this  experienced  personnel  for  the  simple  reason 
that  it  will  be  to  their  advantage  to  do  so. 

Mr.  CONNALLY.  You  say  that  we  have  the  finest  personnel  in  the  world,  and 
that  they  could  earn  more  money  in  the  business  world.  Is  it  the  chief  com- 
plaint that  the  salaries  are  inadequate?  If  it  is,  I  am  for  big  salaries.  I  want 
to  know  what  this  bill  is  about. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Our  material  is  good.  Of  course,  you  might  have  the  finest 
generals  in  the  world,  but  if  their  machinery  were  organized  improperly  you 
could  not  get  effective  service  from  them.  This  bill  provides  a  basic  reorgani- 
zation. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Might  it  not  be  said  in  comment  on  Mr.  Connally's  question,  and 
having  in  mind  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Hughes  and  Mr.  Carr,  as  well  as  yourself, 
that  you  are  speaking  solely  of  the  Consular  Service,  which  is  your  own  field? 

Mr*  SKINNER.  That  is  my  service. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  And  that  the  personnel  of  the  diplomatic  side  is  not,  and  under 
present  conditions  can  not,  be  sufficiently  desirable  to  obtain  for  America  the 
best  results? 

Mr.  CONNALLY.  How  are  you  to  change  it  under  the  Constitution?  The 
President  may  appoint  and  remove.  Xo  law  can  change  that. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  You  can  do  something  to  make  the  personnel  of  the  Diplomatic 
Service  very  much  better. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  It  is  equally  true  of  the  Consular  Service  that  the  President 
can  appoint  anybody  he  pleases  to  be  consul  or  consul  general. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  'But  it  is  not  true  with  regard  to  the  force  under  the  ambassador 
or  consul. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  No.  But  the  President  for  his  own  purposes  can  limit  his  own 
power  of  appointment.  It  lies  within  his  discretion  to  say  to  himself.  "  I  do  not 
propose  to  select  men  for  these  offices  unless  they  measure  up  to  certain  stand- 
ards and  possess  certain  experience."  That  is  in  effect  what  he  says  in  the 
Consular  Service. 

Mr.  TEMPLE.  The  point  I  wish  to  make  is  that  the  President  doo-:  not  have 
constitutional  power  to  appoint  secretaries  irrespective  of  the  regulation:  fixed 
by  Congress. 

24470—22 7 


88  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

Mr.  MOOBES.  Do  you  mean  to  have  it  understood  that  our  foreign  service  is 
more  efficient  or  in  any  other  way  superior  to  the  British  service? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  If  you  spe'ak  of  the  foreign  service  as  a  whole,  no;  I  do  not 
say  it  is  superior.  I  will  say  I  think  it  has  as  good  raw  material  as  other 
services,  but  it  is  not  utilized  as  it  should  be  and  as  it  could  be  under  this  bill. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  There  are  one  or  two  things  I  would  like  to  be  enlightened 
upon.  You  have  given  us  a  very  good  resuin6  of  the  business  of  the  consular 
office  in  London,  consisting  of  55  employees,  besides  various  side  services, 
scrutinizing  the  invoices  covering  $160,000,000  of  goods,  which  requires  a  high 
order  of  ability  in  weighing  evidence  and  unquestionable  honesty  free  from 
any  source  of  corruption.  What  other  consular  offices  are  there  that  do 
business  on  anything  like  that  volume?  Can  you  give  us  the  volume  of  busi- 
ness of  the  French  consular  office  in  Paris? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Of  course  the  American  consulate  general  in  Paris  has  no 
shipping  business  or  claims  business.  In  the  matter  of  invoices  and  value  of 
the  exports  I  should  imagine  that  Paris  and  London  were  much  the  same,  and 
that  is  probably  true  also  of  notarial  services.  Mr.  Lay,  who  has  been  sta- 
tioned at  Paris,  could  tell  you  more  about  that  than  I. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  There  are  not  any  two  consulates  general  abroad  doing  busi- 
ness in  anything  1  ke  that  volume? 

Mr.   SKINNER.  No ;  London  is  very  exceptional. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  How  about  Liverpool?  I  never  knew  that  Liverpool  did  such 
an  enormous  business  with  the  United  States. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Not  as  great  as  London,  but  Liverpool  is  a  busy  office.  It  is 
true  of  all  the  provincial  offices. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  How  and  on  what  basis  of  justification  is  it  sought  to  reduce 
the  pay  of  the  consul  general  at  London  and  Paris,  at  the  head  of  such  an 
enormous  business,  from  $12,000  to  $9,000?  On  what  basis  is  that  justified? 
What  is  the  reason? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  The  scale  of  salaries  in  existing  legislation  is  uneven.  For  ex- 
ample, we  have  certain  consuls  general  at  the  present  moment  who  receive  more 
than  some  consuls.  I  myself  receive  a  higher  salary  than  almost  all  of  the 
ministers.  This  bill  starts  with  the  lowest  salary  and  works  up  to  the  top, 
and  there  is  an  appropriateness  as  between  these  different  salaries.  There  is 
nothing  to  prevent  you  gentlemen  taking  that  scale,  which  is  relatively  correct, 
and  increasing  it  to  any  level  you  like. 

Mr.  Co(  KUAN.  Would  not  that  be  damaging  to  the  general  service?  Are  you 
not  sacrificing  to  a  phrase,  such  as  regularity  in  scales  and  other  expressions 
of  that  nature,  the  independence  of  these  two  corps?  In  one  the  work  is  differ- 
ent and  vastly  more  important,  and  there  ought  to  be  a  difference  in  pay,  if 
you  are  going  to  compensate  them  for  their  labor  to  anything  like  the  extent  of 
its  value. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  It  may  be  hoped  that  under  the  head  of  post  and  representa- 
tion allowances  this  thing  can  be  equalized.  It  is  true,  certainly,  that  in  great 
cities  like  London  and  Paris,  demands  are  made  upon  the  consul  general  which 
are  much  more  numerous  and  onerous  than  in  other  cities  outside  the  United 
States.  It  is  a  matter1  of  common  knowledge  that  London  and  Paris  are  cities 
in  a  class  by  themselves.  The  consul  general  in  these  two  cities  will  always 
have  varied  and  heavy  administrative  duties  to  perform,  while  at  the  same 
time  they  will  be  compelled  to  meet  requirements  of  a  representative  kind  which 
will  make  inroads  on  their  physical  and  financial  resources. 

Mr.  COCKKAN.  He  must  be  of  a  high  order  of  ability,  the  man  who  serves 
at  one  of  these  places.  He  should  have  vigilance  and  ability  as  elaborate  as  that 
of  an  ambassador. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  We  can  take  up  the  matter  in  executive  session. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  What  I  do  not  understand  is  the  reason  why  this  change  is 
desired.  Is  there  any  reason  that  the  framers  of  this  bill  have?  Is  there 
any  explanation  other  than  that  I  have  suggested,  that  there  might  be  a  scale? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Yes. 

Mr.  MOORES.  Would  that  scale  justify  a  horizontal  increase  o£  25  per  cent,  in 
your  opinion? 

Mr.  SKINNER.  Personally,  I  think  such  an  increase  would  be  entirely  justified. 

Mr.  MOORES.  That  is  all. 

Mr.  SKINNER.  I  think  I  should  say  that  the  consuls  have  not  come  here  for 
increased  compensation.  Naturally,  we  should  rejoice  if  Congress  deemed  it 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  89 

•desirable  in  the  general  interest  that  the  level  of  compensation  be  lifted  up  and 
established  on  relatively  satisfactory  lines.  The  immediate  wish  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Consular  Service  is,  and  I  imagine  that  I  am  acquainted  with  as 
many  of  them  as  any  man  in  the  field,  that  the  service  shall  be  fully  developed, 
that  the  wall  I  have  spoken  of  which  separates  them  from  the  diplomatic  offices 
in  which  work  of  the  same  nature  is  carried  on  as  that  which  they  perform 
shall  be  broken  down,  that  they  may  be  relieved  of  the  heavy  anxiety  which 
they  feel  that  upon  separation  from  the  service,  either  as  a  result  of 'old  age 
or  broken  health,  they  will  be  without  resources  other  than  such  as  they  may 
be  so  fortunate  as  to  possess  privately.  They  deem  themselves  in  equity  to  be 
entitled  to  retirement  allowances,  as  much  so  as  members  of  the  Army.  Navy, 
the  judiciary,  and  the  civil  service.  They  are  entirely  willing  to  leave  the 
matter  of  their  compensation  to  your  best  judgment. 

Mr.  COCKKAN.  I  am  thinking  of  the  interests  of  the  service,  and  I  doubt 
whether  you  can  have  for  $9,000  the  class  of  men  that  ought  to  be  appointed 
to  such  consulates  as  at  London  and  Paris.  I  may  be  all  wrong  about  it. 

(Thereupon  the  committee  adjourned  to  meet  again  at  the  call  of  the  chair- 
man.) 


COMMITTEE  ox  FOREIGN  AFFAIRS, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 
Washington,  Tuesday,  December  19,  1922. 
The  committee  this  day  met,  Hon.  Stephen  G.  Porter  (chairman)  presiding. 

STATEMENT   OF  HON.   JOHN  W.   DAVIS,   FORMERLY  AMBASSADOR 
TO  GREAT  BRITAIN,   15  BROAD  STREET,  NEW  YORK  CITY. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  committee  will  be  in  order.  Gentlemen,  you  will  find 
the  hearings  on  the  American  Battle  Monuments  Commission  bill  on  the  table. 
I  hope  to  take  that  up  as  soon  as  we  get  through  with  this  foreign  service  bill. 
Mr.  Davis,  the  committee  would  like  very  much  to  have  your  views  on  this 
bill,  H.  R.  12543. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  have  some  embarrassment  in  appearing  in  the  attitude  of  an 
expert  witness  here  to  instruct  this  committee,  which  knows  a  great  deal  more 
about  the  subject  than  I  can  pretend  to,  but  with  the  background  of  some 
personal  experience  I  do  have  a  very  deep  and  lively  interest  in  this  bill.  That 
is  my  reason  for  appearing  to-day.  I  really  do  not  think  that,  so  far  as  I 
know  the  Govemment  service,  there  is  any  one  place  in  it  that  needs  this  sort 
of  reform  so  badly  as  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Service,  the  foreign  service, 
speaking  as  a  whole.  Speaking  generally,  of  course,  the  diplomatic  branch  of 
that  service  is  the  first  line  in  the  country's  defense,  and  the  Consular  Service 
is  the  spearhead  of  the  country's  trade. 

I  am  quite  aware  of  the  fact,  and  I  assume  we  are  all  aware,  that  the  man 
on  the  street  really  does  not  appreciate  the  importance  of  either  of  these  services. 
Speaking  from  my  experience  in  Congress  and  subsequent  service  in  the  execu- 
tive department  and  in  the  displomatic  corps  itself,  you  constantly  run  into  the 
most  astonishing  ignorance  of  what  the  service  is,  its  importance,  or  what  it 
really  means.  There  is  a  prevailing  impression,  I  know,  that  the  diplomat's 
chief  duty  is  to  attend  pink  teas  and  escort  dowager  duchesses  around  at  cere- 
monial occasions.  Most  people  think  that  the  consul  does  not  come  into  action 
until  somebody  gets  arrested  in  the  port  in  which  he  happens  to  be  residing. 
I  am  sure  that  is  a  quite  prevalent  point  of  view. 

I  have  read  this  bill,  and  it  seems  to  me  it  presents  four  features  which, 
if  I  may  use  the  phrase,  are  cardinal  points  of  reform  in  this  question.  Man- 
ifestly, 'if  we  are  to  get  good  men  in  the  service  and  hold  them,  after  they  get 
there,  we  must  set  them  to  work  under  conditions  which  are  agreeable,  that 
will  stimulate  their  personal  ambition,  and  that  will  induce  them  to  remain 
in  the  service  after  they  have  had  the  experience  which  makes  them  valuable. 
Over  and  over  again,  while  I  was  in  London,  young  men  and  good  men  in  the 
diplomatic  service  would  conre  to  me  in  great  personal  concern  and  ask  me 
frankly  whether  I  thought  they  ought  to  stay  in  the  service.  I  always  asked 
them  what  their  financial  condition  was. 

If  I  found  that  they  had  no  or  at  best  meager  resources  beyond  their  offi- 
cial salary,  I  told  them  with  great  regret  that  I  thought  they  were  doing  an 
injustice  to  themselves,  and  that  at  the  earliest  opportunity  they  ought  to 


90  FOREIGX   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

leave  the  service  and  get  into  something  that  was  not  a  blind  alley.  I  did 
that  because  I  felt  sure  that  the  time  would  come  when  they  would  want 
to  marry,  in  the  normal  course  of  affairs,  and  would  have  children  to  take 
care  of.  and  I  knew  they  could  not  hope  to  raise  a  family  on  the  salary  they 
were  receiving,  and  that  the  time  would  come,  as  it  comes  to  all  men  who 
stay  too  long  on  salaries,  when  they  would  find  it  difficult  to  get  away  and 
would  drag  out  the  rest  of  their  lives  in  discomfort  to  themselves  and  dis- 
comfort to  their  families. 

It  seemed  to  me  then  and  it  seems  to  me  now  that  if  we  are  to  avoid  the 
tremendous  "  labor  turnover  "  there  is  in  the  Diplomatic  Service,  we  must  do 
three  things,  first,  give  them  an  adequate  living  salary,  a  salary  which  will 
keep  them  in  respectable  comfort  as  long  as  they  are  in  the  service;  second, 
give  them  a  fair  chance  of  promotion.  Every  man  in  the  service  ought  to  be 
like  Napoleon's  foot  soldiers,  marching  with  a  marshal's  baton  in  his  knap- 
sack. They  can  not  all  become  heads  of  missions.  A  great  many  of  them  will 
not  become  qualified  to  become  heads  of  missions.  That  is  always  true  in  the 
nature  of  things,  and  I  personally  believe  it  would  be  a  great  misfortune  to 
the  service  if  the  heads  of  missions  should  all  be  taken  from  the  so-called 
diplomats  of  career.  I  think  it  would  be  quite  contrary  to  the  genius  of  our 
institutions  and  would  deprive  the  President  of  a  field  of  selection  he  ought 
to  have,  that  he  should  be  unable  to  reach  out  into  the  general  body  of  the 
citizens  to  m;ike  a  man  ambassador  or  minister.  But  there  ought  to  be  the 
incentive,  the  possibility  that  an  ambassadorship  or  ministerial  position  is 
open  to  every  man  who  enters  the  diplomatic  career,  if  he  has  the  necessary 
qualities. 

There  ought  also  to  be  a  fair  chance  of  promotion  in  the  lower  grades,  and 
there  ought  to.be  a  sufficient  number  of  the  lower  grades  t«>  give  him  from 
time  to  time  the  stimulus  of  an  advance  from  one  grade  to  another,  whenever 
he  has  done  some  creditable  piece  of  work  or  has  shown  a  fair  amount  of 
faculty.  We  must  do  something  if  men  are  to  be  kept  working,  to  stimulate 
their  ambition.  In  the  third  place,  it  is  not  possible,  it  seems  to  me.  that  the 
Government  will  ever  be  able  to  pay  a  salary  on  which  a  man  can  hope  to 
accumulate  any  reserve  fortune.  So  far  as  I  know  there  is  no  post  in  the 
whole  Government  that  gives  a  man  much  chance  to  save,  and  probably  never 
will  be.  The  Government  will  never  be  able  to  compete  with  private  enter- 
prise in  that  respect,  and  that  being  true,  if  the  Government  expects  a  man 
to  give  his  life  to  the  service,  to  take  up  a  presumably  fixed  career,  you  must 
take  away  from  him  the  fear  of  a  dependent  and  penniless  old  age.  You  must 
give  to  these  men  the  same  prospect  of  retirement  that  you  give  to  the  Army 
and  Navy  and  to  the  permanent  civil  service  of  the  executive  departments. 

Granted  adequate  pay  or  reasonable  pay.  granted  a  reasonable  chance  for 
promotion,  as  a  recognition  of  merit,  and  then  granted  a  retirement  allowance 
which  will  enable  a  man  when  he  is  no  longer  useful  to  be  assured  against 
want,  you  will  not  only  get  good  men  but  you  will  be  able  to  retain  them  be- 
cause the  foreign  service  does  offer,  of  course,  a  great  many  things  that  are 
attractive.  It  is  highly  intellectual  labor.  A  man  who  really  enjoys  intellectual 
labor  can  find  in  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Service  all  the  field  that  he 
needs.  It  is  interesting  because  it  is  constantly  taking  him  into  new  phases 
of  work  and  there  is  a  certain  element  of  pride  about  it  because  it  is  a  dignified 
position  to  stand  among  foreigners  as  representing  a  dignified  and  powerful 
nation.  This  consideration  will  draw  men  to  the  service  and  will  hold  them 
there  if  they  are  given  a  fair  chance  to  live  the  sort  of  life  that  they  should 
live  and  at  the  same  time  make  a  provision  for  their  old  age.  I  read  all  these 
three  things  in  this  bill  and  read  them  with  great  satisfaction. 

There  is  one  other  thing  in  the  bill  on  which  I  have  a  pretty  deep  personal 
feeling,  and  that  is  the  provision  for  representation  allowances  to  the  diplo- 
matic officers  of  the  Government.  Of  course,  that  is  an  old  subject.  To  those 
who  have  had  any  experience  with  it.  it  is  rather  a  sore  subject.  It  is  noto- 
rious that  we  never  have  paid  to  our  ministers,  and  especially  to  our  ambassa- 
dors in  the  larger  capitals  a  salary  on  which  it  was  possible  for  them  to  live, 
let  alone  to  carry  on  the  ceremonial  activities  <rat  are  indispensable  in  those 
positions.  Those  ceremonial  activities,  if  wo  Choose  to  call  them  that,  are 
not  mere  matters  of  display  or  pride  or  ostentation.  A  certain  amount  of  that 
sort  of  thing,  as  all  of  us  here  as  reasonable  men  know,  is  indispensable  in 
an  exalted  position  of  that  sort.  To  a  certr.in  extent  the  country  itself  is 
judged  by  the  style  in  which  its  representative  live  abroad.  Human  nature 
being  what  it  is.  men,  people,  officers,  and  nations  are  Indeed  to  a  large  extent 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  91 

by  appearances.  It  may  be  sometimes  a  false  standard,  yet  none  the  less  it  is 
a  standard  which  men  employ,  and  the  country  itself  must  inevitably  be  judged 
to  a  certain  extent  by  the  appearance  that  its  representatives  present. 

There  is  another  side  of  it  that  is  not  so  often  realized  by  the  man  in  the 
street  which  is  even  more  important  than  that.  My  belief  *is  that  what  the 
diplomatic  officer  under  present-day  conditions  furnishes  to  his  Government, 
the  most  valuable  thing  he  furnishes,  is  a  personal  knowledge  of  the  men  who 
are  controlling  the  activities  of  the  nations  with  which  his  Government  deals. 
I  heard  Lord  Bvyce  say  in  an  address  delivered  at  Williams  College,  when  he 
was  over  here  a  year  ago.  that  since  the  coming  in  of  the  telegraph  the  functions 
of  the  ambassador  and  minister  have  become  less  important  than  in  the  old 
days  when  he  sailed  away  for  a  six-weeks'  voyage  and  was  out  of  contact  with 
his  Government  months  at  a  time.  and.  therefore,  was  left  solely  on  his  own 
initiative  and  compelled  to  act  without  instructions.  Now.  when 'the  telegraph 
wire  is  working  every  day,  and  he  gets  instructions  constantly  from  the  other 
end  of  the  line,  his  service  has  become,  if  not  less  burdensome,  rather  less 
indispensable.  I  did  rather  a  rash  thing  for  a  man  who  challenges  Lord  Bryce 
on  any  proposition  more  or  less  takes  his  life  in  his  hands.  I  think  he  had 
the  most  encyclopaedic  mind  I  ever  met,  and  when  it  is  a  question  of  knowledge, 
and  not  of  opinion.  I  cmi  hardly  imagine  anybody  challenging  him  on  anything. 
But  I  ventured  to  discuss  that  with  him  and  told  him  I  thought  perhaps  he  was 
mistaken  about  it.  and  that  instead  of  a  diplomatic  officer  having  become  less 
important  and  less  necessary  by  reason  of  the  telegraph,  he  had  become  more 
so,  because  unquestionably  the  existence  of  this  rapid  communication  has 
greatly  multiplied  the  communications  between  Governments,  and  the  draw.ng 
together  of  the  world  by  rapid  transportation  has  greatly  increased  the  number 
of  questions  which  bring  Governments  into  collision.  It  has  made  it  possible, 
of  course,  for  one  foreign  office  to  correspond  directly  with  other  foreign  unices 
by  telegram  or  by  mail  without  the  intervention  of  the  personal  equation  at  all. 
But  if  it  must  do  so  without  having  a  man  on  the  ground  at  the  other  end 
who  can  say.  What  sort  of  individual  is  this  who  is  being  addressed,  what 
are  his  personal  limitations,  what  are  his  prejudices,  his  views,  how  far  can 
he  be  expected  to  go  along  this  line  or  on  that,  the  foreign  secretary  is  like 
a  man  with  a  blindfold  over  his  eyes,  simply  talking  into  the  air. 

The  function  of  the  diplomatic  officer  nowadays  is  to  let  his  Government 
know  who  the  man  is  at  the  other  end  of  the  wire  and  what  sort  of  influences 
are  working  on  him  that  will  make  him  amenable  to  this  suggestion  or  make 
him  disposed  to  refuse  that.  A  diplomatic  officer  of  to-day  who  is  receiving 
by  wire  correspondence  for  transmittal  to  the  Government  to  which  he  is  ac- 
credited, even  where  it  comes  as  it  frequently  does  in  the  shape  of  a  formal 
note,  prepared  in  the  State  Department,  must  feel  it  his  duty  to  examine  that 
note  in  the  light  of  his  acquaintanceship  with  the  men  on  the  ground.  If  he 
finds  anything  in  it  which  his  knowledge  convinces  him  is  inexpedient,  it  is 
his  duty  to  advise  his  Government  that  in  that  respect  the  note  ought  to  be 
corrected  to  meet  the  particular  situation.  We  can  no  more  get  along  without 
That  sort  of  personal  contact  than  a  business  man  can  sell  his  goods  by  mail 
without  drummers,  who  know  his  individual  customers,  their  tastes,  and  how 
far  they  can  be  accommodated.  That  is  more  or  less  of  a  digression.  I  do  not 
want  to  take  up  too  much  of  your  time. 
The  CHAIRMAN.  Go  ahead. 

Mr.  DAMS.  The  bearing  of  that  on  this  question  of  expense  is  that  you  can 
not  get  an  acquaintance  with  hunrtfr  beings  unless  you  associate  with  them. 
You  have  got  to  get  acquainted  in  that  particular  circle.  You  have  got  to 
get  upon  terms  of  social  intimacy,  as  far  as  opportunity  permits,  with  men 
who  are  responsible  for  the  governmental  policy,  and  that,  of  course,  neces- 
sarily involves  the  interchange  of  those  courtesies  that  go  to  make  up  human 
intercourse.  That  means  expense.  It  is  the  same  sort  of  expense  account 
that  the  manufacturer  lias  for  his  salesmen  when  he  sends  them  out  and  gives 
them  a  salary,  plus  expense  account,  to  be  spent  in  cultivating  the  good  will 
of  their  customers. 

If  I  had  my  way  about  it,  a  perfectly  free  hand.  I  say  to  you  frankly  I 
would  not  raise  the  salary  of  an  ambassador,  possibly  not  of  a  minister,  in 
the  Government  service:  not  because  I  do  not  think  they  earn  their  salaries. 
A  man  in  any  of  these  positions  who  is  of  any  account  at  all  earns  his  salary 
many  times  over  in  his  service  to  the  Government.  They  are  not  sinecures: 
they  are  really  very  hard-working  posts.  But  you  can  not  raise  those  salaries, 
as  'it  seems  to  me.  without  getting  them  out  of  disproportion  to  the  other 


92  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

salaries  that  are  paid  in  the  governmental  establishment.  While  yon  pay  your 
Chief  Justice  $16,500  and  Cabinet  officers  $12,000,  and  so  on  down  the  line, 
I  do  not  think  that  in  due  proportion  you  can  raise  the  salaries  of  your  am- 
bassadors and  ministers,  but  you  can  do  what  every  other  Government  does, 
and  give  them  what  the  French  call  frais  de  representation,  expense  of  repre- 
sentation, which  will  cover  these  necessary  expenses,  which  they  must  under- 
take, which  they  must  assume,  if  they  are  to  become  really  useful  to  the  Gov- 
ernment in  their  positions.  I  think  there  ought  to  be — and  I  am  glad  this 
bill  takes  it  up  in  that  form — that  there  ought  to  be  a  lump  appropriation  given 
to  the  Secretary  of  State  to  be  disposed  of  by  him  in  his  discretion,  and.  of 
course,  with  accountability  to  Congress  and  to  the  Treasury,  in  allotting  to 
the  different  diplomatic  posts  such  expenses  of  representation  as  would  fairly 
enable  them  to  meet  these  indispensable  expenditures,  which  are  not  in  their 
nature  a  private,  but  which  are  really  incurred  for  the  benefit  primarily  of  the- 
Government  they  represent.  I  do  not  know  whether  the  committee  would  be 
interested  and  whether  it  would  help  them  for  me  to  go  into  my  personal 
experience  on  that  subject. 

Mr.  COOPER.  I  would  like  to  hear  it. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Having  been  through  the  mill  I  know  something  about  it. 

Mr.  COOPEK.  It  would  make  the  most  effective  sort  of  an  argument. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  We  would  all  like  to  hear  it. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  No  man  likes  to  talk  about  his  private  or  personal  affairs,  but  you 
will  forgive  my  doing  that,  because  of  the  facts  I  have  to  offer  about  the  con- 
ditions. I  went  to  London  at  a  salary  of  $17,500.  The  State  Department  had 
been  given  the  right  during  the  war  to  make  an  allowance  of  $5,000  a  year 
for  the  purpose  of  entertaining  American  officers  who  were  abroad,  recognizing 
that  two  or  three  million  Americans  were  coming  over  there,  all  of  whom  had 
the  idea  that  the  ambassador's  house  was  theirs,  and  that  he  certainly  would 
have  some  additional  expense,  so  it  allowed  $5,000  for  that  purpose.  At  the 
en -1  of  my  first  year,  that  allowance  was  revoked,  and  after  some  more  or  less 
earnest  protest  on  my  part,  I  think  they  made  it  $3,000  the  second  year.  That 
was  all.  I  am  quite  sure  that  my  establishment  in  London  was  more  modest 
than  that  of  any  other  ambassador  there.  My  house  was  not  large;  my  whole 
establishment  was  the  most  modest.  I  did  not  do  a  great  deal  of  eutertaning. 
I  only  did  the  entertaining  which  was  indispensable  to  return  the  courtesies 
which  I  officially  received.  Of  course,  yoircan  not  always  take  and  never  give. 
You  must  entertain  the  officials  of  the  Government  who  entertain  you  to  be 
recognized  as  on  a  friendly  footing  with  them. 

I  paid  as  rent  for  my  own  house  $S,000  in  round  figures — that  is,  paid  1,500 
pounds  sterling,  plus  rates  and  taxes,  which  are  the  real  estate  vents  on  it; 
which  it  cost  me  every  year  I  was  there,  roughly.  There  was  also  a  very  low 
rate  of  exchange  which  I  had  in  my  favor  the  whole  time,  the  low  rate  of  ex- 
change on  the  pound  sterling,  which  went  once  as  low  as  S8.30  and  ran  from 
that  to  $4.10,  and  up  and  down.  Living  as  I  was,  without  any  ostentation — 
it  was  not  a  time  for  ostentation,  and  had  I  been  a  multimillionaire  I  would 
not  at  that  particular  time,  under  the  circumstances.' have  indulged  in  the 
slightest  ostentation  whatever :  the  British  people  were  just  coming  out  of  the 
war,  were  all  distressed,  still  had  the  wounds  on  their  persons  and  were  bowed 
down  with  financial  difficulty,  and  any  man  who  would  have  made  a  display 
at  that  time  would  have  made  himself  unpopular ;  it  was  eminently  a  time 
for  conservatism  and  quietude — but  with  ail  that,  living  as  I  was.  counting  the 
expenses  of  myself  and  family,  which  is  small,  it  cost  me,  roughly,  time  times 
my  salary  every  year  I  was  there,  between  fifty  thousand  and  sixty  thousand 
dollars.  I  do  not  believe  that  anybody  could  possibly  have  done  it,  done  it 
decently,  with  any  less  expenditure  than  that.  Now,  of  course,  that  is  not  fair. 

There  is  another  thing  which  I  think  the  public  rarely  realizes,  not  only  do 
they  send  a  man  abroad  under  circumstances  that  compel  him  to  make  those 
expenditures  as  to  which  he  has  no  choice  and  as  to  which  it  is  not  a  question 
of  saying,  "  I  will  or  will  not ;"  it  is  a  question  of  "  must."  They  forget  also 
that  they  send  him  abroad  under  circumstances  which  forbid  him  to  economize 
even  in  the  expenditures  which  he  makes.  I  do  not  know  how  it  is  now  in 
Washington,  but  I  know  how  it  was  when  I  was  in  Congress  10  years  ago. 
There  was  a  definite  scale  of  charges  in  Washington  for  Congressmen  and  there 
was  another  scale  for  residents,  and  you  might  complain  against  it  as  much 
as  you  choose,  but  when  it  come  to  rent  you  paid  the  congressional  rate.  When 
;i  man  goes  abroad  as  a  representative  of  the  United  States,  which  the  people 
on  the  other  side  of  the  water  believe  to  be  an  El  Dorado,  I  can  assure  you  he- 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  93 

pays  the  highest  market  rate,  and  perhaps  a  little  more  for  everything  he  gets, 
and  he  can  not,  of  course,  as  a  representative  of  a  dignilied  and  great  country, 
get  down  to  higgling  with  his  butcher  or  grocer  about  his  bills.  He  is  simply 
compelled  to  pay  what  he  is  charged,  and  he  is  charged  on  the  theory  that  he 
represents  the  richest  country  on  earth.  You  can  not  get  away  from  that 
situation.  There  it  is,  and  nothing  that  can  be  done  on  this  side  of  the  water  can 
change  it. 

That  is  the  situation  and  unless  we  are  to  confine  our  diplomatic  representa- 
tives to  two  classes  of  people,  those  with  private  fortunes,  and,  without  using 
invidious  words,  to  spendthrifts,  we  have  got  to  do  something  to  remedy  it. 
I  think  the  proper  course  is  the  course  suggested  by  this  bill,  to  set  up  a  rep- 
resentation fund  out  of  which  the  Secretary  of  State  can  measurably  and  with- 
out extravagance  or  ostentation  enable  these  officers  to  live  as  they  are  com- 
pelled to  by  the  commission  that  they  are  given. 

I  think.  Mr.  Chairman,  that  is  a  synopsis  of  my  views. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Are  there  any  questions  from  members  of  the  committee? 

Mr.  COOPKR.  Will  the  owning  of  the  embassy  building  by  the  Government  help 
a  great  deal?  It  will  help  some. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  It  will  help  some,  undoubtedly.  Of  course,  in  the  first  place,  it 
takes  out  the  question  of  rent.  On  the  other  hand,  that  building  is  a  larger 
imilding  than  the  one  I  occupied,  quite  a  large  one  that  Mr.  Morgan  gave  in 
London.  That  is  two  large  old  houses  thrown  into  one,  and  it  will  require  a 
considerable  alteration  inside  to  make  it  thoroughly  comfortable  and  livable. 
It  will  require  more  servants  to  keep  it  going  than  the  house  I  occupied,  which 
is  a  single  house.  In  that  sense  it  will  be  a  more  expensive  house  than  the 
one  I  occupied!  and  the  Government,  I  think,  should  put  a  permanent  staff  in 
the  house,  which  would  simply  stay  there  as  ambassadors  came  and  went,  and 
also  look  after  the  heating  and  lighting  of  it.  It  will  probably  be  more  ex- 
pensive in  these  respects  for  an  ambassador  to  live  in  that  house  than  to  live 
where  I  did.  I  think,  therefore,  that  on  taking  over  that  house  the  Govern- 
ment ought  to  assume  some  of  the  expenses  of  it — the  permanent  upkeep. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  You  have  spoken  of  the  experience  of  the  ambassador  at  London; 
your  statement  has  been  most  interesting.  I  think  we  all  feel.  What  can  yon 
tell  the  committee  in  a  general  way  about  the  problems  of  ambassadors  and 
ministers  at  other  capitals,  and  also  about  the  problems  of  the  secretaries  and 
consuls  general  in  the  various  countries.  In  other  words,  what  I  want  to  get 
for  our  study  is  not  altogether  your  individual  experience  in  one  capital,  but 
the  situation  so  far  as  you  have  experienced  it  in  talking  with  your  colleagues, 
or  otherwise,  in  the  other  countries  of  the  world  and  in  other  grades  of  the 
service. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Of  course,  I  have  spoken  of  my  own  experience  because  it  is  of 
the  nature  that  a  personal  touch  gives  to  it,  and  the  thing  I  know  most  about. 
I  do  not  know  a  great  deal  in  detail  about  any  other  capital.  I  do  know  by 
hearsay  that  the  conditions  are  the  same  mutantis  mntaudum  all  along  in  the 
service.  I  had  some  talk  with  Ambassador  Sharp  when  I  was  in  Paris,  and 
found  that  his  problems  were  exactly  the  same  that  I  had,  his  expense,  I  think, 
running  relatively  the  same.  I  do  not  think  I  could  give  you  any  detailed 
information  about  any  others  except  to  say  it  lies  in  the  nature  of  things  that 
what  I  have  suggested  must  be  true  everywhere. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  do  not  suppose  the  counselor  at  London,  with  a  salary  of 
$4,000,  sends  very  much  money  home  out  of  his  salary. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  No.  Wright  was  counselor  most  of  the  time  during  my  service. 
He  was  an  excellent  man  and  had  some  small  private  means.  I  know  his 
salary  could  not  support  him,  and  yet  he  lived  in  very  modest  fashion. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Do  you  think  that  the  enactment  of  some  such  legislation  as 
this  would  enable  the  foreign  service  to  be  a  better  and  more  businesslike  and 
efficient  foreign  service  for  this  Nation? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  have  not  the  slightest  doubt  about  it,  and  I  do  not  think  the 
importance  of  such  a  service  can  be  exaggerated.  You  may  send  abroad,  if 
you  choose,  as  ambassadors  and  ministers,  men  who  have  the  gifts  of  angels*. 
They  land  in  the  foreign  country,  most  of  them,  a  country  with  which  they 
have  not  been  previously  largely  acquainted.  There  are  a  great  many  routine 
methods  of  doing  things  with  other  governments  which  these  have  built  up 
around  themselves.  They  must  depend  upon  their  secretaries,  who  should  be 
men  of  experience,  who  know  what  the  methods  of  operation  are.  They  must 
depend  largely  upon  their  secretaries  also  to  bring  them  the  current  infor- 
mation upon  which  they  depend.  You  have  got  to  have  a  .staff  of  secretaries 


94  FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UXITED   STATES. 

persona  grata  at  the  foreign  offices  with  individual  contacts  there  not  only 
for  the  information  they  bring  you  hut  to  check  up  the  information  you  get 
yourself.  You  can  not  always  believe  the  tirst  story  you  hear,  and  these  men 
are  really  your  eyes  and  ears.  They  can  not  be  too  good.  We  have  some 
very  good  men  among  them  along  with  others  who  are  not  of  the  best.  We 
have  all  sorts,  but  the  best  is  none  too  good  for  that  service:  of  that  I  feel 
perfectly  sure. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  With  respect  to  this  question  of  embassies  abroad,  is  the 
character  or  weight  or  standing  of  an  ambassador  affected  to  some  extent 
by  his  place  of  residence,  the  kind  of  house  he  occupies,  and  the  state  he 
keens  up? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  To  some  extent,  yes:  to  a  very  much  greater  extent  abroad  than 
it  possibly  could  be  in  this  country. 

Mr.  COCKHAX.  I  understand  that.  I  am  asking  particularly  with  reference 
to  England. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes:  to  some  extent  there. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  In  my  time  there  was  Mr.  Reid,  who  occupied  Dorchester 
House,  one  of  the  largest  establishments,  and  Mr.  Bayard,  who  occupied  a 
very  modest  house,  very  tin1.-',  but  by  no  means  as  splendid  a  place.  Between 
Dorchester  House  and  such  an  establishment  as  Mr.  Bayard  occupied.  then- 
Is  a  tremendous  gap  in  point  of  splendor  and  appearance'.' 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  What  effect  is  it  likely  to  have  upon  the  public  mind  of  a 
country  like  England  to  find  one  ambassador  living  in  the  very  highest  state 
that  the  city  can  afford  for  a  private  individual  of  private  means,  and  another 
occupying  a  very  modest  establishment  which  by  contrast  is  almost  humble? 
What  effect  is  that  likely  to  have  upon  the  public  mind  of  a  country  like 
England,  for  instance? 

Mr.  DAVIS.   It  does  have  some  effect  on  the  public  mind,  no  doubt. 

Mr.  COCK  RAX.  Do  you  think  it  would  conduce  to  more  harmonious,  and  equal, 
and  therefore  effective,  representation  for  every  ambassador  to  occupy  the 
same  place? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Undoubtedly  it  would,  in  so  far  as  the  public  would  not  longer 
infer  differences  between  them.  It  is  quite  right. 

Mr.  COCKIJAN.  You  think  they  are  liable  to  misinterpret  that? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Quite  true.  They  think  this  man  must  be  well  thought  Of  at 
home  and  that  man  not  so  well  thought  of. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  They  do  not  know  the  establishments  are  supplied  by  the 
ambassador,  as  they  assume  that  they  are  supplied,  as  in  all  other  countries, 
at  the  public  expense? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Quite  true. 

Mr.  MOORK.  Will  you  look  at  section  13  of  this  bill,  and  see  what  you  think 
of  the  provision  as  it  appears  there,  with  reference  to  representation  allow- 
ances, the  allotment  and  disbursement  of  that  allowance?  We  have  had  a  great 
deal  of  testimony  here  with  reference  to  the  necessity  of  representation  allow- 
ances. 

Mr.  COCKRAX.  What  page? 

Mr.  MOORE.  Page  7.  section  1H.  representation  allowances  to  lower  diplomats- 
."lid  consular  officers.  Do  you  think  that  is  a  good  way  to  express  the  proposi- 
tion, leaving  the  matter  wholly  to  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of  State? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  do  think  so.  I  do  not  think  that  is  a  matter  on  which  ym 
can  leg  slate  in  detail  because  conditions  are  so  different  at  different  posts. 
and  they  are  so  different  at  the  same  post  from  time  t<-  time.  In  other 
words,  when  English  exchange  is  down  to  *3..~>M.  ;'  man  can  be  quire  comfortable 
on  a  salary  that  would  starve  him  if  sterling  was  at  par.  There  are  post-- 
where  the  salary  of  $5,000  is  ease  and  comfort.  There  are  other  posts  where 
the  salary  of  *r><M)0  !s  not  a  living  compensation.  Those  things  tiuetuate.  and 
T  think  any  definite  scale  that  you  miirht  insert  in  the  legislation  would  be 
bound  to  work  an  injustice,  no  matter  how  just  it  would  be  at  the  moment  it 
was  passed. 

Mr.  M(X)RE.  Would  your  thought  be  that  we  should  entrust  the  distribution 
of  the  allowances  to  the  ambassador  IT  minister  in  a  given  country,  who 
would  make  allotments  directly  to  the  consular  and  diplomatic  officers  other 
thnn  those  holding  the  higher  posts? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  think  the  power  of  allotting  should  be  with  the  Department 
of  State,  but  I  can  not  imagine  a  Secretary  of  State  who  would  not  be  glad 
to  have  the  views  ,-f  an  ambassador  or  minister  as  to  the  allotments. 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED  STATES.  95 

Mr.  ROGERS.  That  has  been  the  practice  in  connection  with  the  allocation 
of  post  allowances.  It  has  always  been  in  the  sole  discretion  of  the  Secretary 
of  State. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes;  and  I  think  for  the  purpose  of  administration  it  is  better 
that  it  should  be.  I  think  it  would  expose  the  ambassador  and  his  staff  to 
unnecessary  embarrassment  to  give  to  some  and  deny  to  others.  It  is  much 
better  that  the  burden  should  be  off  his  back,  as  it  would  be  an  embarrass- 
ment and  create  friction. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  We  thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Davis. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  am  very  much  obliged  to  you  gentlemen  for  your  extreme  pa- 
tience. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  FBANK  L.  POLK,  FORMERLY  UNDERSECRE- 
TARY OF  STATE,  6  EAST  SIXTY-EIGHTH  STREET,  NEW  YORK 
CITY. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Proceed. 

Mi-.  I'or.K.  Mr.  Davis  has  so  thoroughly  covered  the  bill  before  the  com- 
mittee that  I  will  not  take  up  much  of  your  time.  There  are  a  few  points 
That  I  may  stress,  and  one  or  two  that  I  will  go  into  in  detail,  as  I  am  prob- 
ably more  familiar  with  the  inside  workings-  of  the  Consular  Service,  having 
been  on  the  inside  looking  out  most  of  the  time. 

After  five  years'  experience  in  the  State  Department,  I  wish  to  say  that  I 
think  we  have  a  remarkable  group  of  men  in  the  Diplomatic  and  in  the 
Consular  Service.  They  are  men  who  in  many  instances  have  taken  their 
lives  in  their  hands,  done  courageous  and  brilliant  pieces  of  work  in  different 
countries,  not  recognized,  inadequately  paid.  These  men  were  constantly  being 
taken  away  from  us  by  organizations  that  recognize  their  worth  and  outbid 
what  the  Government  could  pay.  and  what,  of  course,  the  Government  never 
can  pay.  The  Government  never  can  compete  with  private  business  as  to 
salary,  but  I  feel  that  every  effort  should  be  made  to  hold  the  good  men  that 
we  have,  and  get  a  constant  supply  of  the  material  that  will  ripen  into  the 
sort  of  men  this  Government  should  have.  The  difficulty  that  confronts  the 
Secretary  of  State  is  always  the  question  of  getting  the  men  in  the  Diplo- 
matic and  the  Consular  service  that  can  be  educated.  A  man  when  he  first 
starts  in  these  two  services  needs  education  just  as  much  as  a  bond  salesman 
or  steel  salesman  or  any  other  kind  of  business  man.  He  has  to  be  trained 
and  he  has  to  be  a  man  of  some  education  to  begin  with,  being  required  to 
talk  at  least  two  languages.  Otherwise  this  Government  can  not  be  properly 
represented  in  foreign  countries. 

In  so  far  as  the  Diplomatic  Service  is  concerned,  as  Mr.  Davis  says,  it  is 
almost  impossible  for  a  man  to  stay  in  the  service  unless  he  has  independent 
means,  not  necessarily  a  great  deal,  but  some.  The  men  that  we  have  had 
have  been  fine  in  most  part.  I  think  the  average  of  the  Diplomatic  Service 
has  been  higher  or  as  high  as  any  other  branch  of  the  Government,  but  the 
criticism  that  can  be  very  properly  made  of  the  Diplomatic  Service  is  that  it  is 
not  sufficiently  democratic.  That  is  not  the  fault  of  the  men  in  the  service :  it 
is  the  fault  of  the  system,  that  does  not  permit  a  man  to  come  into  the  service 
unless  he  has  money  at  the  start.  I  frequently  have  men  come  to  me  now,  just 
the  sort  of  men  that  should  be  in  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Service,  who 
ask  my  advice  as  to  whether  they  should  take  the  examinations,  and  I  am  com- 
pelled to  tell  them  no,  that  unless  they  are  in  position  to  help  themselves,  that 
it  is  not  a  career  that  a  man  should  pick  out.  If  he  can  barely  support  himself, 
he  certainly  can  not  support  a  wife. 

Having  caught  your  men  the  problem  is  to  hold  on  to  them.  When  I  was 
in  the  State  Department — I  recall,  and  Mr.  Can-  will,  a  number  of  our  good 
men  who  had  been  trained  in  the  service  and  were  at  a  point  where  they  were 
of  real  value  to  the  Government.  Private  corporations  would  make  such  offers 
that  these  men  could  not  refuse.  I  have  in  mind  one  man  drawing  $4,500  salary, 
taken  out  at  a  salary  of  $25,000.  A  good  many  men  when  an  offer  is  made 
to  them  decline  it  for  the  average  man  having  entered  the  Government  service 
prefers  to  stay  there  if  he  can  get  along  at  all.  Mr.  Davis  has  covered  the  point 
in  regard  to  the  popular  prejudice  against  the  Diplomatic  Service,  that  it  is 
purely  a  social  organization.  I  do  not  know  a  harder  worked  body  of  men. 
.A  man  who  is  in  that  service  has  not  only  the  social  duties  that  must  be  per- 
formed in  order  that  he  may  come  in  contact  with  people  with  whom  he  has 


96  FOREIGN   SERVICE   OF   THE    UNITED   STATES. 

to  do  business,  but  in  addition  to  that  he  has  hard  and  arduous  duties  at  his 
desk,  which  takes  time  and  patience  and  training. 

The  salaries  paid  in  the  Diplomatic  Service  from  the  counselor  down  are 
far  below  the  salaries  paid  by  the  British  Government.  Those  figures,  I  am 
glad  to  see,  you  have  ordered  to  be  put  into  the  record. 

The  feature  of  the  bill  that  appeals  to  me  is  making  the  two  branches  of 
the  service  interchangeable.  It  is  going  to  be  a  good  thing  for  the  Consular 
Service,  and  it  is  going  to  be  a  good  thing  for  the  Diplomatic  Service.  You  will 
get  a  class  of  men  from  the  consuls  for  the  Diplomatic  Service  who  have  had 
probably  a  little  more  practical  experience  than  men  in  the  Diplomatic  Service. 
On  the  other  hand,  you  are  going  to  get  in  the  Consular  Service  from  the 
Diplomatic  Service,  men  who  have  probably  had  a  wider  view  of  wrorld  affairs 
than  a  consular  office  may  afford.  It  is  true  that  the  consul  often  has  to  go 
to  small  out-of-the-way  ports  where  the  commerce  of  the  United  States  re- 
quires his  presence  and  therefore  he  does  not  get  the  opportunity  of  broaden- 
ing education  that  the  man  in  the  Diplomatic  Service  of  necessity  is  bound 
tn  set  if  he  is  any  good. 

Mr.  Davis  knows  so  much  more  about  the  question  of  expenses  of  embas- 
sies, from  his  personal  experience,  than  I  do  that  I  hesitate  to  speak  of  it. 
But  I  did  come  in  contact  with  many  of  our  ambassadors  who  would  come 
back  here  on  leave  and  would  discuss  with  them  their  living  problems.  The 
story  that  he  tells  in  regard  to  London  is  the  same  story  you  hear  as  to  all- 
posts:  Petrograd  in  the  old  days,  Berlin,  Vienna,  Rome.  They  would  all 
tell  the  same  story.  You  have  the  same  situation  in  the  big  legations.  The 
men  were  spending  out  of  their  private  funds,  in  many  instances  going  into 
debt. 

Mr.  FISH.  Do  you  favor  taking  over  buildings  or  the  building  of  embassies 
in  the  more  important  cities? 

Mr.  POLK.  Yes;  undoubtedly.  I  would  not  for  a  moment  compete  with  some 
of  the  buildings  other  countries  may  have,  for  instance,  the  Austrian  embassy 
in  Paris  had  a  whole  block,  but  I  think  we  should  have  an  adequate,  dignified 
building  in  all  the  capitals.  The  moment  it  is  known  that  the  American 
ambassador  is  looking  for  a  house  rents  go  right  up.  I  think  it  is  undignified 
that  the  representative  of  our  country  should  be  put  in  the  position  of  a 
house  hunter  just  as  soon  as  he  arrives. 

Mr.  FISH.  We  are  considering  establishing  a  fund  with  sufficient  money  to 
buy  these  embassies.  I  understand  the  Austrian  embassy  we  could  have  had 
for  $200,000.  which  is  probably  worth  a  great  many  millions. 

Mr.  POLK.  It  is  one  of  the  most  valuable  properties  in  Paris. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  Do  you  agree  with  Mr.  Davis  that  the  weight  or  standing  of 
an  ambassador  is  to  a  certain  extent  affected  by  the  character  of  the  building 
he  occupies? 

Mr.  POLK.  Undoubtedly. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  And,  therefore,  all  ambassadors  for  that  reason  should  occupy 
the  same  buildings? 

Mr.  POLK.  Unquestionably,  because  I  have  seen,  as  you  have  personally,  in 
both  London  and  Paris,  the  fact  that  one  ambassador  was  able  to  have  a  palace 
and  other  men  a  modest  gentleman's  house  was  misunderstood. 

Mr.  COCKBAN.  Most  people  thought  that  was  because  the  Government  thought 
so  much  more  of  one  than  the  other. 

Mr.  ROGEBS.  Mr.  Davis  told  us  that  the  necessity  of  being  as  moderate  in  his- 
expenditures  as  he  could  properly  be  resulted  in  his  adding  twice  the  amount  of 
his  salary  out  of  his  own  pocket  each  year,  so  that  his  expenditures  were  three- 
times  his  salary,  as  I  understood  him.  Should  you  think,  and  I  appreciate  it 
can  be  very  little  more  than  a  guess,  that  surveying  the  world  diplomatic  field 
generally,  it  is  true  that  an  ambassador,  minister,  or  secretary,  representing 
the  United  States  in  whatever  capacity,  would  probably  have  to  expend  twice 
as  much  as  his  salary  out  of  his  own  pocket  in  order  to  get  along  and  do  t he- 
decent,  reasonable  thing  for  his  country? 

Mr.  POLK.  I  think  that  is  a  perfectly  safe  statement. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  That  does  not  seem  like  a  particularly  democratic  arrange- 
ment, does  it? 

Mr.  POLK.  No. 

Mr.  COLE.  In  other  words,  the  highest  services  will  be  closed  to  all  except 
the  richest  men. 

Mr.  Por.K.  Unquestionably:  the  man  who  is  willing  to  take  the  position  must 
usually  go  into  his  capital  for  the  privilege  <>f  serving  in  an  important  post. 


FOREIGN   SERVICE   Ob    THE   UNITED   STATES.  97" 

Mr.  ROGERS.  While  you  were  in  the  Department  of  State,  did  you  see  evi- 
dences of  an  attempt  to  draw  something  ak.n  to  a  social  line  between  the 
diplomatic  service  and  the  consular  service? 

Mr.  POLK.  You  mean  by  the  department? 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Primarily.  I  have  heard  it  said,  by  certain  of  the  less  capable 
and  useful  members  of  the  diplomatic  service. 

Mr.  POLK.  I  would  not  go  so  far  as  to  say  they  try  to  draw  a  line,  but  I 
think  some  of  the  less  intelligent  members  of  the  diplomatic  service  may  fancy 
they  occupy  positions  of  some  advantage.  I  will  put  it  that  way. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Do  you  not  think  the  result  of  this  interchangeable  provision, 
may  be  useful  in  eliminating  any  snobbishness  in  the  foreign  service? 

Mr.  POLK.  I  was  not  looking  at  that  particular  feature  of  the  bill  as  a  form 
of  punishment.  I  was  looking  at  it  as  a  form  of  education.  You  take  a  very 
promising  young  man  who  has  never  had  contact  with  anything  but  the  rather 
pleasant  side  of  life,  if  you  send  him  out  to  some  of  these  consular  posts,  he  will 
come  back  a  very  much  better  man,  with  a  very  much  broader  view  of  life,  and 
will  be  a  very  much  better  public  servant. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  And  will  realize  he  is  entirely  mistaken  in  trying  to  look  down 
on  his  foreign-service  associates. 

Mr.  POLK.  In  trying  to  draw  any  distinction  whatever  between  the  two 
services.  I  think  one  of  The  strong  features  of  this  bill  is  that  it  makes  the 
service  interchangeable. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Do  you  think  well  of  the  retirement  system? 

Mr.  POLK.  I  think  that  is  an  essential  part  of  the  system.  You  see  men 
long  in  the  service  with  salaries  seven  or  eight  thousand  dollars  living  abroad 
and  having  to  move  their  families  frequently  at  a  great  expense,  and  they  can 
not  possibly  lay  by  a  penny.  If  they  are  faced  by  the  fact  that  in  their  old 
age  they  will  have  nothing  to  look  forward  to,  if  a  man  is  a  bright  man  he  is 
not  going  to  stay,  and  the  other  man  who  is  going  to  stay  will  be  in  constant 
terror  with  the  thought  of  an  old  age  with  no  support  for  himself  or  children 
and  family. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Speaking  generally,  you  think  that  the  enactment  of  some  such 
legislation  as  this  would  give  us  a  better  and  more  efficient  and  more  business- 
like foreign  service? 

Mr.  POLK.  I  do.  I  feel  very  strongly  that  neither  the  Diplomatic  nor  Consular 
Services  are  appreciated  as  necessary  services.  We  have  these  tremendous 
world  problems,  and  it  is  impossible  for  any  Government  official  to  handle 
these  problems  without  proper  information.  Mr.  Davis  has  referred  to  the 
Diplomatic  Service  as  the  eyes  and  the  ears  of  the  Government.  It  is.  Unless 
we  have  trained  men  in  the  field  to  study  and  report  on  these  conditions,  we 
are  at  a  hopeless  disadvantage.  One  of  the  impressive  things  I  witnessed  in 
Paris  was  the  knowledge  shown  by  the  men  from  the  British  foreign  office. 
They  were  men.  for  the  most  part,  about  30  years  old ;  had  been  in  every  part 
of  the  world ;  studied  their  problems  and  knew  them.  I  am  not  saying  that 
critically  of  our  men.  because  such  of  our  men  who  had  the  same  opportunities 
held  their  own.  I  think  both  the  British  and  French  foreign  offices  were 
tremendously  impressed  with  the  grasp  shown  by  our  men  who  had  had  the 
opportunity  to  study  the  questions,  but  where  we  had  one  or  two  they  would 
have  a  dozen,  and  many  of  our  experts  had  to  be  drawn  from  our  universities 
and  paid  good  salaries — higher  than  our  service  men. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  The  question  will  be  asked,  will  it  not,  why,  if  we  can  hold  our 
own  with  the  present  system,  we  should  change  it? 

Mr.  POLK.  I  say  we  had  one  or  two  to  their  many. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  This  bill  would  not  give  us  more  men. 

Mr.  POLK.  No :  but  you  would  hold  your  men.  Many  of  the  service  men  who 
were  in  Paris  have  resigned  to  go  into  business.  We  are  constantly  filling  in. 
We  have  vacancies  now.  I  remember  the  time  when  we  had  35  vacancies  and 
13  applications.  The  men  do  not  stay.  We  are  constantly  educating  men  and 
turning  them  out  to  go  into  other  businesses. 

Mr.  MOORE.  At  the  particular  time  you  spoke  of  in  Paris,  I  suppose  you  had 
picked  men  selected  from  various  localities? 

Mr.  POLK.  Picked  men.  We  had  men  from  universities  and  colleges  and 
men  we  had  trained  ourselves.  We  had  to  bring  men  back  into  the  service.  tx> 
get  them  to  come  back  and  sacrifice  their  business  to  help  us.  This  country  will 
not  be  properly  represented  in  a  diplomatic  or  business  way  until  we  build  up 
this  service  in  such  a  way  that  we  get  the  right  men,  train  them,  and  hold  them. 
Those  three  things  are  absolutely  essential.  Remember  you  can  not  separate 


98  FOREIGN*   SERVICE   OF   THE    UXITED  STATES. 

business  and  diplomacy.  They  go  hand  in  hand.  Economic  problems  are  at 
the  bottom  of  all  wars. 

Mr.  MOORE.  Do  you  recall  what  your  post  or  representation  allowances  totaled 
while  you  were  in  the  State  Department? 

Mr.  POLK.  During  the  war,  of  course,  it  was  very  high :  $700.000  in  1918. 

Mr.  MOORE.  Have  you  that  figure,  how  much  it  would  take  to  take  care  of 
this  thing  in  the  way  of  representation  allowances? 

Mr.  POLK.  Not  in  time  of  peace. 

Mr.  MOOKE.  Would  you  care  to  conjecture  what  it  would  cost  under  present 
conditions? 

Mr.  POLK.  I  really  do  not  know.  My  guess  would  be  of  no  value.  I  do 
feel  from  the  commercial  and  political  standpoint  that  we  can  not  adequately 
meet  the  situation  until  we  have  a  service  properly  educated  and  properly 
paid  st>  we  can  hold  them  after  we  educate  them.  No  man  in  private  business 
would  educate  men  just  to  let  them  go  out  in  some  other  line  of  work. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  want  to  repeat  for  the  members  of  the  committee  who  were 
not  present  what  I  have  said  informally,  that  a  very  large  number  of  organiza- 
tions and  of  individuals  have  indicated  a  desire  to  be  recorded  in  favor  of  this 
measure,  the  organizations  and  individuals  in  question  being  both  people  who 
would  interest  the  committee  and.  I  think,  would  inform  the  committee.  I 
do  not  want  to  multiply  these  hearings,  and  unless  it  is  the  pleasure  of  the 
committee  otherwise,  it  occurred  to  me  that  perhaps  we  had  about  all  the 
information  that  we  needed  to  go  ahead.  I  should  very  much  like  to  have 
the  committee's  viewpoint  on  that,  however. 

Mr.  MOORE.  I  do  not  think  we  need  information  on  that  subject.  I  do  think 
that  the  House  needs  information  on  this  subject,  and  there  are  some  members 
who  read  the  hearings.  We  have  quite  full  hearings,  nearly  100  pages,  plus 
what  there  has  been  to-day. 

Mr.  COCKRAN.  I  think,  Mr.  Chairman,  we  might  conclude  the  hearings  now, 
as  we  have  been  informed  as  far  as  information  from  the  outside  can  benefit 
us.  I  move  that  the  hearings  be  closed. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  If  there  is  no  objection  the  hearings  will  be  closed. 

(Thereupon,  at  11.30  o'clock  a.  m.,  the  committee  adjourned  to  meet  again 
at  the  call  of  the  chairman.) 


CHAMBER  OF  COMMERCE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA, 

Washington,  D.  C..  December  .',?.   /.''.>.?. 
Hon.  JOHN  J.  ROGERS, 

Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs, 

House  of  Representatives. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  ROGERS:  With  regard  to  your  bill  ( H.  R.  12.r>43)  for  the  re- 
organization and  improvement  of  the  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Services.  I  de- 
sire to  express  to  you  the  attitude  of  the  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  the  United 
States.  Our  tenth  annual  meeting,  held  in  May  of  this  year,  made  the  fol- 
lowing declaration  on  the  part  of  the  1,300  and  more  chambers  of  commerce 
and  trade  associations  which  constitute  this  chamber: 

"The  business  men  of  our  country  are  most  appreciative  of  the  valuable 
services  rendered  to  them  day  by  day  both  in  the  diplomatic  and  consular 
branches  of  the  Department  of  State.  For  these  services  adequate  support 
should  at  all  times  be  given." 

Our  organization  is,  therefore,  solidly  committed  in  favor  of  adequate  sup- 
port for  the  Consular  and  Diplomatic  Services.  "Adequate  support"  means 
recognition  of  the  present  defects  in  organization,  in  compensation,  and  in 
personnel.  We  feel  that  the  increased  importance  of  our  international  rela- 
tionships, particularly  in  view  of  the  unsettled  conditions  abroad,  makes  it 
necessary  for  the  United  States  Government  to  follow  foreign  affairs  more 
closely  in  all  sections  of  the  world.  While  our  membership,  as  broadly  repre- 
sentative of  business,  takes  especial  interest  in  the  development  of  the  expert 
commercial  service  under  the  Department  of  Commerce,  we  are,  nevertheless, 
appreciative  of  the  fact  that  our  consular  and  diplomatic  officers  under  the 
Department  of  State  are  a  great  force  through  which  our  public  and  private  in- 
terests abroad  generally,  including  our  commercial  interests,  are  protected 
and  furthered.  We  have  noted  the  improvement  of  the  foreign  services  of 
other  Governments,  and  we  have  felt  that  our  own  Consular  and  Diplomatic 
Services  should  not  be  allowed  to  remain  largely  on  a  pre-war  basis,  no  longer 


FOREIGN    SERVICE   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  99' 

adequate  to  meet  the  pressing  needs 'of  representation  of  the  United  States. 
With  the  chamber  committed  by  resolution  in  annual  meeting  in  favor  of  such 
a  program  of  adequate  support  for  the  Consular  and  Diplomatic  Services,  we 
have  taken  a  special  interest  in  H.  R.  12543.  That  bill  has  been  examined  by 
our  staff  and  by  our  board  of  directors,  and  our  board  decided  that  the  cham- 
ber should  support  the  main  principles  in  that  bill  as  tangibly  carrying  out 
the  chamber's  announced  policy. 

We  have,  accordingly,  not  hesitated  to  call  this  measure  to  the  attention  of 
the  chambers  of  commerce  and  trade  associations  in  our  membership  and  to 
invite  their  approval.  For  your  information  I  may  say  that  we  have  had 
indication,  not  only  from  organizations  here  at  home,  but  likewise  from  Ameri- 
can chambers  of  commerce  established  in  foreign  countries,  that  the  improve- 
ment of  the  Consular  and  Diplomatic  Services  promised  by  congressional  action 
along  the  lines  now  proposed  will  mean  much  for  American  business. 

We  believe  that  the  things  that  need  doing  at  this  time  include  the  following : 

1.  Reclassification  of  the  Consular  Service  on  a  better  organization  basis. 

2.  Keclassification   of   the   service   of   diplomatic    secretaries   on   a   basis  of 
salaries  comparable  to  those  paid  in  the  consular  branch. 

3.  Breaking  down  the  water-tight  compartments  of  the  Consular  and  Diplo- 
matic Services,  enabling  the  Secretary  of  State  to  use  good  men  in  either  branch 
of  the  foreign  service  as  events  may  make  advisable,  and  opening  up  broader 
careers  to  the  men  in  the  service. 

4.  Opening  up  the  career  of  diplomatic  secretary  to  men  other  than  those  of 
independent  means. 

5.  Enactment  of  retirement  legislation  for  the  career  men  both  in  the  Diplo- 
matic and  Consular  Services,  thus  providing  for  the  retirement  of  men  grown 
old  in  the  service,  retaining  good  men.  and  attracting  men  who  can  not  afford 
to  enter  the  services  under  the  present  system. 

6.  Giving  recognition  in  basic  law  to  needed  post  expense  allowances,  includ- 
ing necessary  representation  allowances  for  officers  in  the  foreign  service  of  the 
United  States  in  direct  connection  with  their  official  duties. 

If  you  and  your  colleagues  will  put  through  legislation  bringing  about  im- 
provement on  these  lines,  I  believe  it  will  be  of  direct  and  undoubted  benefit 
to  American  business :  will  give  us  a  more  competent  foreign  service  all  round ;, 
and  will  place  our  foreign  service  on  a  basis  more  in  harmony  with  the  demo- 
cratic ideals  of  the  United  States  than  at  present. 
Very  truly  yours, 

.TUJYUIS  H.  BARNES,  President. 


REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


A     000013783     6 


